Coverage & Claims

Subscribe to Coverage & Claims via RSS

Cases on the anti-deprivation rule are coming with increasing frequency. In the latest case, reported as Folgate London Market Limited (formerly Towergate Stafford Knight Co Limited) v Chaucer Insurance PLC [2011] EWCA Civ 328, an insurance broker had agreed to indemnify a company against liability in respect of a personal injury claim where the insurers had declined cover on the basis of an exception in the policy. …
Read More UK: English Court of Appeal decision on the Anti-deprivation Rule

Nikolaus von Bomhard, chief executive of Munich Re AG the world’s largest reinsurer, views insurance protection against the risk of nuclear incidents as unaffordable for insurers and power plant operators, according to a recent interview he gave in the German national Sunday newspaper Welt am Sonntag. …
Read More Nuclear Risk Too Expensive To Underwrite?

According to a recent article in the New York Times, insurance and reinsurance companies from Japan and abroad, as well as hedge funds and other investors in catastrophe bonds, are expected to bear a relatively small portion of the losses stemming from the earthquake and resulting tsunami, which is expected to exceed $100 billion.  By way of comparison, the 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan resulted in approximately $100 billion of damages, according to the Insurance Information Institute, but only about $3 billion of that was covered by insurance. …
Read More Japan’s Government Will Likely Bear Most of the Damages Resulting from the Earthquake

Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member [2011] EWCA Civ 24 concerned an appeal brought by Masefield against the High Court’s finding (previously reported in our June 2010 issue, which report also includes full facts of the case) that the capture of Masefield’s biodiesel on board the Bunga Melati Dua was not an ‘actual total loss’ under section 57 of the Marine Insurance Act 1906. …
Read More Court of Appeal: Capture of Ship and its Cargo by Somali Pirates Seeking Payment of Ransom Does Not Constitute “Actual Total Loss”