In a sprawling 163 page opinion issued just last week, the Connecticut Appellate Court addressed, as a matter of first impression, five different issues that will significantly affect the disposition of asbestos, and potentially other, long tail claims in Connecticut.
Read MoreOn May 3, 2016, the Court of Appeals of New York issued its opinion in In re Viking Pump, No. 59, 2016 WL 1735790, and found that “all sums” allocation and vertical exhaustion applied to the insureds’ claims to excess coverage for the asbestos exposure claims filed against them.
Read MoreFollowing agreement by both Houses of Parliament, the Mesothelioma Bill received Royal Assent on 30 January 2014, becoming the Mesothelioma Act 2014 (the Act).
Read MoreIn a victory for Massachusetts premises owners and their insurers, the Massachusetts Superior Court recently dismissed all claims against a group of twenty-three premises owners whom the Plaintiff alleged were liable (under both strict liability and negligence theories) for the development of the decedent’s asbestos-related mesothelioma.
Read MoreOn 25 July 2012 two papers were published which may affect the way in which EL insurers deal with mesothelioma victims who cannot trace their employers or EL insurers.
Read MoreA Ministry of Justice Report released in March 2012 has confirmed that the implementation of the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 (the “Act“) is to be delayed until 2013.
Read MoreThe Supreme Court has handed down its decision in the Employers’ Liability Insurance Trigger Litigation (see judgment here). The ruling has provided clear rules governing how EL policies should respond to mesothelioma claims.
Read MoreThe Supreme Court’s decision in the Employers’ Liability (EL) Insurance “Trigger” Litigation is expected imminently. It is not just insurers who eagerly await that decision.
Read MoreRecent comments by a UK Commercial Court judge indicate that policyholders are entitled to “spike” their entire liability for a mesothelioma claim into any one year of employers’ liability (EL) cover. Spiking potentially arises where the period of EL cover is shorter than the period of negligent exposure to asbestos.
Read MoreIn Williams v University of Birmingham [2011] EWCA Civ 1242 the Court of Appeal analysed the correct approach to proving liability in a mesothelioma case. The Court emphasised that the relaxation of normal principles of proof in relation to mesothelioma claims, laid down by the House of Lords in the Fairchild case (Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002] UKHL 22), apply only to the need to prove causation.
Read More
