Related insights: Professional Risks Disputes

Thumbnail

Casualty disputes 2021: six key cases

20 Jan 2022
As we begin 2022, Womble Bond Dickinson looks back at six key legal cases from 2021 which we think will be of particular relevance during the new year to those defending casualty claims.
Thumbnail

The post-pandemic hybrid workplace and increased cyber risks

20 Jul 2021
The pandemic has marked a turning point in cybersecurity and law firms are a significant and growing target of cybercriminals. With many firms adopting a new permanent "hybrid" working system we consider the risks, how PII policies might respond to a cyber claim and what changes may lie ahead.
Thumbnail

SAAMCo regenerated… (again)

28 Jun 2021
Has there ever been a principle talked, written and argued about amongst Judges and practitioners alike since the House of Lords decision over 25 years ago? Following our article in September 2020 addressing the Court of Appeal's application of the SAAMCo principle in AssetCo v Grant Thornton, the Supreme Court judges have recently had even more to say regarding the application of SAAMCo in professional negligence cases. 
Thumbnail

Solicitors' negligence – when is it too late to claim?

20 May 2021
Whether a claim is time-barred is one of the first issues to consider in defending professional negligence claims. The fact that a professional has concurrent duties in contract and tort each with different limitation periods means that claimants can rely on whichever duty has the best outcome for them.
Thumbnail

Professional negligence – insurance brokers in the firing line again?

10 Mar 2021
The Commercial Court's decision in ABN Amro Bank NV v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance plc [2021] EWHC 442 (Comm) makes for a sobering read for insurance brokers and cargo insurers. Insurers and insurance brokers involved were held liable for losses of some £33.5 million in circumstances where the cover claimed had no precedent in the market.
Thumbnail

BI Insurance claims: what happens next?

28 Jan 2021
Following a "leapfrog" appeal, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark judgment on 15 January 2021 on how non-damage business interruption insurance (BI) policies should respond to claims arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic. The judgment represents a significant victory for insureds: BI cover is available under most of the policies considered. It is important to flag, however, that most SMEs holding traditional BI policies which respond to claims arising out of physical loss or physical damage will not benefit from this judgment. We consider the implications of the judgment and what happens next.

Claim trends against solicitors in the pandemic

05 Nov 2020
As we begin a second national lockdown, the challenges facing law firms have not abated. The pandemic has been a real test of law firm's IT systems, business resilience and business continuity plans. Vulnerabilities in these areas will be the primary source of COVID-19 related professional indemnity claims against solicitors but rapid changes in some practice areas bring further risks and challenges. We examine the risks and assess how the pandemic has impacted claim trends against solicitors.

Court of Appeal to examine SIPP provider case

22 Oct 2020
In May, we wrote about the High Court judgment in Adams v Options SIPP UK LLP which offered SIPP providers some comfort that, in circumstances where a loss is suffered by a member and the SIPP provider is acting on an execution only basis, they will not usually be liable for any loss suffered by the investor on investments made through the SIPP, including investments introduced to the member by unregulated providers.
Thumbnail

FCA test case: disruption in the new normal

15 Sep 2020
The judgment in the FCA test case concerning the operation of several non-damage business interruption insurance clauses has been handed down today. Groups representing policyholders are claiming victory, however, beyond the headlines is a complex and nuanced judgment. Nevertheless some broad themes can be discerned and insurers will want to consider these and re-assess their approach to all business interruption claims and not just those arising from COVID-19.