The coronavirus pandemic is likely to throw up some interesting challenges for employers and their liability insurers. How are the courts likely to approach the novel situation where employees may seek to claim for injuries arising through exposure to COVID-19 in the workplace, and how can employers and their insurers take steps to protect themselves from a tidal wave of claims?
The UK Government has underlined the central role transport operators will have in the reopening of the UK economy as COVID-19 lockdown restrictions are eased by publishing detailed guidance in the form of 'Coronavirus (COVID-19): Safer Transport Guidance for Operators'. But it is clear that the process of returning to normality will be a gradual one. There are also risks for transport operators including potential claims from employees and passengers as a result of injuries allegedly caused by exposure to COVID-19. We examine the guidance and consider what transport operators should do to manage the personal injury liability risks.
We previously reported on FCA's intentions to bring a test case to obtain court declarations that would help resolve contractual uncertainty in several business interruption policies, stemming from claims relating to COVID-19. On 1 June, it confirmed the results of its enquiries to date, and its next steps.
The judgment handed down in Adams v Options SIPP UK LLP by the Chancery Division of the High Court may give SIPP providers some comfort on their exposure to liability when acting on an execution-only basis and a SIPP member suffers loss on an investment made through their SIPP.
The High Court has reiterated that the primary aim of search orders is to preserve evidence, not to serve as some form of early disclosure. The High Court also chose to remind parties (and their representatives) that exceeding the permission given to them by these search orders, carries with it the risk of substantial penalties and severe consequences. In a recent case, it was held that the Claimant and its legal representatives, who pre-emptively searched seized material, without the Defendants' or the Court's permission, committed "serious and completely unjustified" breaches of the terms of the search order.
We continue our examination of the implications of the COVID-19 crisis for professionals and their insurers in the context of a challenging economic environment and the correlation between recession and claims against professionals. This article looks at how COVID-19 issues may impact on insurance brokers, construction professionals and directors and officers.
FCA has announced today (1 May) its intention to obtain a court declaration on business interruption ("BI") insurance to resolve doubt for businesses who are facing uncertainty on their claims in the light of the ongoing problems resulting from COVID-19. Its decision comes in the light of continuing and widespread concerns about the lack of clarity and certainty for some customers making BI claims, and the basis on which some insurers are making their decisions on claims.
COVID-19 is having a devastating impact on the lives of individuals, businesses and societies all over the world. As the human cost of COVID-19 continues to mount, it is clear that there will also be a huge economic fallout which many predict will be more significant than the 2008 global financial crisis. Indeed, some economists believe that a number of economies are already in recession. Recent history has taught us that there is a correlation between recession and claims against professionals. In the first of two articles, we examine the potential implications of COVID-19 for risk profiling for professionals and their insurers. This first article looks at the implications for solicitors, surveyors and auditors.
Following recommendations made by the Commercial Court Witness Evidence Working Group (WEWG) in December 2019, some limited amendments to witness statements and the statement of truth took effect on 6 April 2020. While the reforms are far from radical (the majority of the WEWG did not favour radical reform), the courts are likely to take a tougher approach in circumstances where a witness statement has been clearly over worked by lawyers. We examine the issues and consider the implications for solicitors, parties to litigation and their insurers.
The most recent round of litigation in the Morrisons data breach litigation ended in success for Morrisons at the Supreme Court. The headline ruling was that Morrisons was not vicariously liable for the acts of a rogue employee who stole and distributed employee data.