header-logo header-logo

Reinsurance

20 November 2009
Issue: 7394 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Equitas Ltd v R and Q Reinsurance Company (UK) Ltd [2009] EWHC 2787 (Comm), [2009] All ER (D) 154 (Nov)

When it came to proving that a reinsured came within the provisos of a settlement clause, a distinction had to be drawn between the facts which generated the claims and the legal extent of the cover provided.

Contracts of reinsurance were independent bargains, separate from the underlying contracts of insurance. In order for insurers to recover from their underwriters, they had to prove the loss in the same manner as the original assured had had to prove it against them.

The insurance market, in order to simplify and hasten procedures, had however developed ‘settlement clauses’ to get round the need to prove their loss by proving an insured loss of the original subject-matter.

Under such a clause, the reinsurers agreed to indemnify insurers in the event that they settled a claim by their assured, provided that the claim fell within the risks covered by the policy of reinsurance as a matter of law.

How a claimant proved that

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll