header-logo header-logo

Solicitors Indemnity Fund: far from a done deal?

28 May 2021 / Andrew Stovin
Issue: 7934 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Regulatory , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail
49939
Retired solicitors could be left out in the cold with the closure of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund, as Andrew Stovin explains

I refer to a recent NLJ news article, ‘New claims risks for shuttered firms’, which treats the closure of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF) as a fait accompli. The question is: why should it be a fait accompli, or more fundamentally, why should it close at all?

Crunching the numbers

Let us look at some facts taken from SIF’s annual report and accounts for the year ended 31 October 2020.

In the introductory narrative, there is the heading ’Purpose and principal activities of the fund’. One of the stated purposes is:

‘Manage new claims and settle the associated liabilities arising from firms insured in the open market and which have ceased without successor from 1 September 2000 and where the requisite six-year run-off period provided by their last market insurer or the Assigned Risks Pool has elapsed (“post six-year run off claims”)’

This

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll