Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Insurance
CLAIMANT'S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: THE INSURED'S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT

CLAIMANT’S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: THE INSURED’S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

Today we are looking at a case where the court considered the impact of The Third Party (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 in detail.  The court decided that the insurer was not liable to indemnify a claimant who had been…

A POSSIBLE SOLUTION WHEN A DEFENDANT IN A PI CASE WILL NOT PAY: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT'S HOME INSURANCE POLICY

A POSSIBLE SOLUTION WHEN A DEFENDANT IN A PI CASE WILL NOT PAY: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE POLICY

September 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Damages, Enforcement, Insurance, Members Content

I am repeating something that has appeared in this blog twice already.  However it is a topic that that has featured in recent legal discussions on Twitter.  That is the use of your own client’s home insurance policy to recover damages…

YOU'VE STARTED SO YOU'LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

YOU’VE STARTED SO YOU’LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

August 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Insurance, Members Content

In Advantage Insurance Co Ltd v Stoodley & Anor [2018] EWHC 2135 (QB) Master Davison set aside the claimant’s notice of discontinuance made after reading the defendant’s  additional written submissions after a hearing.  The notice of discontinuance was viewed as “tactical….

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM OF £533,017.13 : EYE-WATERING DECISION FOR INSURERS

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM OF £533,017.13 : EYE-WATERING DECISION FOR INSURERS

November 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Insurance, Insurance premiums, Members Content

In Percy v Anderson-Young [2017] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that an after the event premium of £533,107.13 was recoverable. There was no sympathy for the defendant.   “… in my judgment, any sympathy for the Defendant here…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: RECOVERABILITY OF PREMIUMS & PROPORTIONALITY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: RECOVERABILITY OF PREMIUMS & PROPORTIONALITY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Insurance, Insurance premiums, Members Content

In Peterborough & Stamford Hospitals NHS Trust v McMenemy & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1941 the Court of Appeal considered the position in relation to the payment of insurance premiums in clinical negligence cases. The Court decided that it is appropriate…

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEEK DETAILS OF DEFENDANT'S INSURANCE COVER

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEEK DETAILS OF DEFENDANT’S INSURANCE COVER

April 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Members Content

In Peel Port Shareholder Finance Company Ltd-v- Dornoch Ltd [2017] EWHC 876 (TCC) Mr Justice Jefford refused an application for pre-action disclosure of an insurance policy. There is an interesting discussion of the scope of pre-action disclosure and the interrelationship…

SUING THE "MAN OF STRAW":  WHY YOU NEED TO CHECK YOUR OWN CLIENT'S INSURANCE BEFORE GIVING UP ON A PERSONAL INJURY CASE

SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”: WHY YOU NEED TO CHECK YOUR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE BEFORE GIVING UP ON A PERSONAL INJURY CASE

January 29, 2017 · by gexall · in Enforcement, Members Content, Useful links

There was recently some comment, and quite a few readers, of a post on “suing the man of straw”. This was the second post ever on this site.  There were comments on Twitter that people were surprised by the post…

INSURANCE, FUNDING AND LITIGATION: INSURERS HAD TO PAY SOLICITORS

January 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is an interesting judgment by Stuart Brown QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Nesbit Law Group LLP -v- Acasta European Insurance Company Limited (Leeds Mercantile Court 15.9.16). The judgment is available here nesbitjudgment A judgment on…

THE THIRD PARTIES (RIGHTS AGAINST INSURERS) ACT 2010 1: 5 INITIAL POINTS

May 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Insolvency, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 is shortly to come into force. Here are 5 key points. Here we look at the implementation date, legislative history and basic definitions of the Act. A BRIEF OVERVIEW The Act allows…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 4: THE COURT SETS ASIDE A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS MORATORIA AND ALLOWS BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE
  • COST BITES 422: THE ORDER FOR INTERIM COSTS IN THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE : THE JUDGE WAS UNIMPRESSED WITH CLAIMANT’S “WEAK ARGUMENTS TO BOLSTER HIS ALREADY WEAK COSTS SUBMISSIONS”
  • COST BITES 421 : THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE IS BACK IN COURT: CLAIMANT’S AGGRESSIVE CONDUCT OF A CASE WHERE HE LOST “ON EVERY MATERIAL POINT OF FACT AND LAW” LEADS TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
  • SERVICE POINTS 51: HIGH COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER ALLOWING SERVICE BY EMAIL ON THE DEFENDANT’S SOLICITORS
  • TWO PROCEDURAL POINTS TO WATCH: GIVING REMOTE EVIDENCE FROM ABROAD: SEEKING COSTS BEFORE THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

Top Posts

COST BITES 419: HOW CLAIMING COUNSEL'S FEES ON AN N260 CAN LEAD TO REFERRAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: SIGNATORY BEWARE
LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT...) AND THE COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS "WHAT IS A TRIAL?": THE DEFINITION PROVES TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS APPELLANT...
COST BITES 421 : THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE IS BACK IN COURT: CLAIMANT'S AGGRESSIVE CONDUCT OF A CASE WHERE HE LOST "ON EVERY MATERIAL POINT OF FACT AND LAW" LEADS TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
MAZUR MATTERS 66: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD FINAL REPORT ON MAZUR: "REGULATORY REVIEW OF ADVICE AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED TO THE PROFESSION ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGAITON BY APPROVED REGULATORS AND REGULATORY BODIES"
EXPERT WATCH 63: WHEN A DOCTOR WRITES TO THE COURT AND THE JUDGE FINDS THE INFORMATION "UNRELIABLE"

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.