header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Third parties rights against insurers: old versus new

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
22 September 2017 / Roger Franklin
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail
nlj_7762_franklin_0

When it comes to Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers), where the 1930 Act applies, the 2010 Act does not. Roger Franklin explains

  • The provisions of the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 shall not have retrospective effect so as to circumvent the less attractive former regime under the 1930 Act.

It is now more than a year since the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the 2010 Act) came into force and a number of cases are starting to bring the statutory reform to the forefront of judicial scrutiny. In the recent judgment of Redman v (1) Zurich Insurance Plc and (2) ESJS1 Ltd [2017] EWHC 1919 (QB), All ER (D) 07 (Aug), Turner J made it clear that the provisions of the 2010 Act shall not have retrospective effect so as to circumvent the less attractive former regime.

Recap

The aim of the statutory reform and the introduction of the 2010 Act was to replace the previous regime set out in the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers)

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Motor commissions & fiduciary duties
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
NLJ this week: The power of Interpol red notices
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Approach with caution post-Mazur
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Philip Sales is selected as next Deputy President
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Tax shock ahead for partners?
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll