header-logo header-logo

12 November 2010 / Rehana Azib
Issue: 7441 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

A mixed bag

Rehana Azib reports on liability, protection & limitation

The eagerly anticipated judgment of the Court of the Appeal in the Employers’ Liability (EL) Trigger Litigation was handed down last month, the results of which were rather a mixed bag.

Insurers appealed against the decision of Burton J at first instance. The judge adopted a causation approach to the construction of the insurance policies and that were in force at the date of inhalation of asbestos dust which subsequently caused mesothelioma many years later, were liable to indemnify on the basis that injury was actually sustained and disease was contracted when it was caused ie at that time and not subsequently. The appellants relied on Bolton MBC v Municipal Mutual Insurance Limited [2006] 1 WLR 1492, [2006] All ER (D) 66 (Feb) in which injury was sustained or the disease was contracted when the employee actually suffered it, which would be at the time the disease manifested itself in the form of a tumour. It is worth bearing in mind, however, that Bolton concerned a policy of public liability insurance.

The appeal was allowed in

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll