Our Commercial & Regulatory disputes team are well versed in advising and representing policyholder in relation to insurance coverage on a standalone basis or within the context of an existing commercial dispute or regulatory investigation.
Our experience extends to claims on D&O, professional indemnity, public liability, business interruption (including infectious disease and prevention of access clauses) and other specialist policies on either a claims made or occurring basis.
Recent illustrative examples of our work include advising on: PI coverage relating to FCA investigation and past business review; D&O coverage relating to insolvency and unfair prejudice claims; business interruption coverage relating to the cancellation or postponement of international sporting and hospitality events; public liability arising from a high profile disaster; specialist coverage relating to the interruption of large scale multi-use property development sites or employee / contractor fatalities arising from health and safety failures; and pursuing negligence claims against brokers.
We are able to advise on your policy’s key terms relating to notification, excess, aggregation, limits of indemnity, extensions of cover, conduct of claims, subrogation, proof of loss submissions and dispute resolution including via arbitration. The strength and depth of our litigation offering also means that we can provide strategic advice where the resolution of your insurance claim dovetails with the conduct of any ancillary commercial or corporate dispute and regulatory investigation.
We pride ourselves on being approachable and focused on the most pragmatic way to mitigate your business or financial risks and losses during a time of crisis.
We are recognised and ranked in Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners for the specialist work that we do in this field.
Advising various business sector clients with Covid-19 business interruption and event cancellation claims.
Acting for a US medical device manufacturer defending an MDL in product liability indemnity claims through the entire excess tower.
Acting for a public sector client defending litigation relating to an historic event giving rise to public liability insurance recoveries across several decades.
Advising a manufacturer under a Business Combined Insurance Policy for material damage caused to machinery and business interruption losses due to a sudden and extended failure in the electricity supply from the National Grid.
Acting for an energy company under an Erection All Risks and Consequential Loss Policy in a physical damage and business interruption coverage dispute in relation to damage to a power station in Asia.
Acted for a pharmaceutical company in high value Bermuda Form arbitrations against a number of its insurers in relation to the scope and extent of its Product Liability coverage of third party US class action claims.
Acted for a web based company under its Privacy Risks Policy for data protection breaches as a result of a fraudulent boiler-room scam, which included investigations by the SFO and FCA.
Advised a UK bank in an indemnity claim under their Corporate Crime Policy in respect of a substantial third party fraud.
Advised one of the UK’s leading outsourcing companies on Professional Indemnity cover in respect of failed film finance investment schemes.
Acted for Munnelly Support Services Limited in a High Court Claim brought against Liberty and ACE in 2017 relating to a coverage dispute between the respective PI and EL insurance covers.
Represented a water company in an insurance property claim arising out of damage to a reservoir dam wall due to a sink hole
Acting for a captive reinsurer in a $500m political risk expropriation loss subject to LCIA arbitration.
Acted for reinsurers Wasa International Insurance Company Limited in their successful appeal to the House of Lords in July 2009 against Lexington in respect of back to back reinsurance cover for underlying US environmental pollution losses and a US$100m clean up bill to US aluminum producer, Alcoa.
Acted for Japanese reinsurers in Aioi Dowa Insurance Co Ltd v Heraldglen Ltd and Another [2013] EWHC 154 (Comm), which was an appeal on a point of law from an arbitral award, as to whether the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center were caused by one unified act of terrorism or two separate acts of hijacking to determine the number of occurrences.
Successfully defended Aviva Canada Inc. in having a reinsurance High Court claim by Minster Insurance Company dismissed against them
