header-logo header-logo

12 June 2008 / Jolyon Patten
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Features , Public , Insurance / reinsurance , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Unlawful conduct

Jolyon Patten explains why local authorities cannot act as insurers

In a landmark two-part judgment (Risk Management Partners Ltd v Brent London Borough Council and others [2008] All ER (D) 226 (May)) which will have far-reaching implications for the insurance industry and for local authorities, the High Court has found that Brent LBC had no power to participate in London Authorities Mutual Limited (LAML), a mutual insurer for London borough councils. It also found, in principle, that no local authority can participate in such a mutual if it does so to save money on its insurance. In additional (obiter) comments, the judge held that there might be circumstances in which a local authority could do so, but that there was no evidence that LAML could bring itself within those circumstances.

A second judgment in the same case addresses for the first time in the UK the so-called Teckal exemption to EU rules on public procurement. Here, it was found that Brent did not have the necessary control over

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll