header-logo header-logo

Stumbling blocks

23 May 2014 / David Niven , David O'Brien
Issue: 7607 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail
web_niven

David Niven & David O’Brien consider the obstacles ahead for PII claimants

Professional negligence claims are an unfortunate fact of professional life: unfortunate for the professional and client alike. Professional indemnity (PI) insurance exists, in theory at least, to protect those unfortunate clients and to ensure that they recover the losses which they have suffered as a result of negligent advice or service. In practice, many claimants find themselves fighting a second and/or simultaneous battle with the PI insurers. This article focuses on professional negligence claims against solicitors.

Fully covered?

The first stumbling block for a claimant is that neither the defendants nor their insurers are required to confirm that the claim will be covered by the PI policy, nor to disclose the terms of indemnity under the policy, until the defendant solicitors have gone into insolvent liquidation. At that point, and having proven their claim, claimants can pursue the insurers directly under the Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930.

There is therefore a very real risk that a claimant

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll