Steven O’Sullivan examines the wide-reaching implications of AIG v Woodman
- The Supreme Court’s judgment in AIG v Woodman is a welcome, lucid and sensible application of the interpretation of the relatively new solicitors’ indemnity aggregation clause.
On 22 March, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment on the most important case in over a decade on aggregation of insurance claims. One might think that this case is relevant only to insurance lawyers and not really of interest to the wider legal profession (see AIG Europe Ltd v Woodman & Ors [2017] UKSC 18, [2017] All ER (D) 151 (Mar)). However, in fact it has wide-reaching implications not just for claimants but for everyone who is unfortunate enough to face multiple claims. It is therefore relevant to all those charged with insuring against such claims, including solicitors in practice. Although AIG is a solicitors’ liability case, the implications go beyond solicitors, due to the presence of such clauses in insurance policies, particularly professional indemnity policies.
Facts of the case
The defendants, a firm of solicitors (the solicitors),
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
