header-logo header-logo

25 July 2014 / Andrea Leadsom
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Opinion , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

A step in the right direction

comment_leadsom

Andrea Leadsom MP welcomes the consensus to bring insurance contract law into the 21st century

The Insurance Bill introduced to Parliament last week updates some important elements of insurance law—currently set out in the Marine Insurance Act 1906 (MIA 1906), which embodies principles developed in the 18th and 19th centuries. Existing legislation is outdated and does not reflect the commercial expectations of many businesses seeking to buy insurance. This frequently leads to disputes between insurers and policyholders, causing delay, expense and uncertainty. Policyholders cannot always predict whether their insurer will pay out or rely on technical legal arguments to deny claims, which increases the likelihood of policyholders buying insurance based on price alone. This could reduce the quality of insurance products available on the market, which has the potential to undermine the reputation of one of the UK’s leading industries.

The changes the government is introducing mean that British insurers are better equipped to compete against their global competitors, some of whom have already introduced more modern legal regimes for insurance,

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll