header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Triple cover, single mistake?

226825
How do overlapping insurance policies interact? In NLJ this week, Chris Bates and Jordan Ball of Penningtons Manches Cooper explore this question in Watford Community Housing Trust v Arthur J Gallagher Insurance Brokers Ltd 

The claimant, a housing trust, held three policies covering data breaches but only notified one, based on negligent broker advice. When losses exceeded the £6m recovered, the trust sued. The broker argued that ‘other insurance’ clauses limited total recovery to £5m. The court disagreed, ruling that the clauses cancelled each other out, entitling the claimant to the full £11m across all policies.

The judgment confirms that multiple insurance is lawful and beneficial—provided policies lack ‘rateable proportion’ clauses. For insureds, it’s a win for commercial common sense. For insurers, it’s a warning: if you want to limit liability, say so clearly. Brokers, meanwhile, are reminded that poor advice can prove costly.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll