header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 September 2017 / Roger Franklin
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Third parties rights against insurers: old versus new

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll