header-logo header-logo

An equitable offer in mesothelioma case

02 June 2015
Issue: 7655 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Insurers have an equitable right of recoupment where they supply cover for only part of the period of asbestos exposure, the Supreme Court has ruled.

According to Keoghs, which acted for interveners the Association of British Insurers in the case, the judgment in International Energy Group (IEG) v Zurich [2015] UKSC 33 means that in mesothelioma claims where insurance does not cover the whole period of asbestos exposure, insurers can seek a contribution from solvent policyholders. Where the policyholder is insolvent, insurers will pay the whole claim. The claimants will always get full compensation.

Guernsey energy firm IEG’s predecessor employed Alan Carré for more than 27 years until 1988 and exposed him to asbestos dust. Zurich provided employers’ liability insurance for six of the 27 years of asbestos dust exposure.

Mr Carré subsequently died of mesothelioma. In 2008, he brought a claim against IEG, which was settled later that year by a £250,000 compensation payout plus £15,300 in costs. IEG also incurred defence costs of £13,151.60, and sought to recover all their outlay from Zurich on the basis that a material contribution to the risk of disease is enough to satisfy the legal test of causation. Zurich agreed but argued that the law of equity should give them a right of recoupment.

The Justices held that the intention of the insurer in the policy was to provide cover for the whole mesothelioma, and a majority of the court held that equity gave the insurer a right of contribution against co-insurers.

Joshua Munro, of Hailsham Chambers, who acted for IEG, writing this week for NLJ, says: “There is no doubt that this is a stunning result for insurers. 

“A brand new equitable right of recoupment from an insurer to its insured has been established. Even though this is presently restricted only in respect of mesothelioma claims, for the first time English law has recognised an equitable right of an insurer to compensation from its own insured in respect of the claim on the policy.”

Insurance specialist Nicholas Bevan says: “This is very reassuring news for claimants. It means that provided one insurer can be traced who was on risk for a single year of significant exposure, he or she will be assured of recovering their full compensatory entitlement; leaving it to the insurers to sort out the often very tricky arguments over proportionality.” 

 

Issue: 7655 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll