header-logo header-logo

23 July 2014
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Welcoming the Insurance Bill

The Insurance Bill introduces significant reform for commercial policies and will benefit both insurer and insured, says leading barrister Alison Padfield.

Padfield, of Devereux Chambers, said one of the most significant changes was on breach of warranty, particularly the abolition of basis clauses. These clauses, which occur in almost all commercial policies, state that everything in the proposal form forms the basis of the contract. This means that insurers don’t need to pay out for completely unrelated breaches, for example, if a ship sails into a war zone and then sails out again unharmed but catches fire years later. These clauses are now abolished, which means remedies can be breached.

“These clauses seemed counter-intuitive and surprising to clients when they were explained, and I think that is a good indication that reform was needed,” said Padfield.

“Overall, the Bill attempts to strike a balance between insured and insurer.”

The Bill introduces a new remedy for breach of “fair presentation”. Currently, the policy can be entirely avoided as if it never existed if it is later discovered that the insured failed to disclose everything about their business. Under the Bill, however, the insurer would have to say what they would have done had they known and the payment would be reduced proportionately.

The Bill also repairs a mistake in the Third Parties (Rights against Insurance) Act 2010, preserving the policy claim even if the insurer goes into administration. This means the Act can finally be brought into force. It has been delayed as the current version only applies if the insurer went into administration through a court order.

Issue: 7616 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll