[vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”fenchurch-grey” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”140061″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_custom_heading text_color=”color-xsdn” uncode_shortcode_id=”144863″ text_color_type=”uncode-palette”]Insurance News, views and more – from Fenchurch Law[/vc_custom_heading][vc_custom_heading text_color=”fenchurch-pink” text_size=”h6″ uncode_shortcode_id=”121955″ text_color_type=”uncode-palette”]OCTOBER 2023[/vc_custom_heading][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”183967″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image media=”3158″ media_width_percent=”100″ uncode_shortcode_id=”168189″ media_link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fenchurchlaw.co.uk%2Fpeople%2Fdavid-pryce%2F”][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”823252″]
David Pryce [1]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text_color=”fenchurch-pink” uncode_shortcode_id=”136865″ text_color_type=”uncode-palette”]Introduction[/vc_custom_heading][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”135719″]Welcome to the latest Fenchurch Law newsletter: concise, topical and often opinionated articles on the insurance disputes market, all from a pro-policyholder perspective.
In this edition, Amy Lacey [2] looks at the structural problems associated with RAAC and how it may affect the UK Construction sector.
Dru Corfield [3], assesses the UK regulatory landscape in Artificial Intelligence.
Jonathan Corman [4] considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in RSA & Ors v Tughans, a successful outcome for our clients, Tughans, in their long-running dispute with their PI insurers.
In our “100 Cases Every Policyholder Needs to Know” series, we bring you two cases. Read why we think MacPhail v Allianz Insurance plc was an ugly decision and why Pan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd was a good one.
In our Team News section, discover how employees of Fenchurch Law completed the Chiltern 50 Ultra Challenge.
Lastly, we’ve got some great upcoming events this month, so please check out the events section below for more information.
I hope you enjoy reading Insurance News and Views and that you look out for future issues in your inbox
David Pryce
Founder and Managing Partner [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”” uncode_shortcode_id=”554195″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”605993″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image media=”3175″ media_width_percent=”100″ uncode_shortcode_id=”299215″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text_color=”fenchurch-pink” uncode_shortcode_id=”209935″ text_color_type=”uncode-palette”]Viewpoint[/vc_custom_heading][vc_custom_heading uncode_shortcode_id=”742907″]
Bubble Trouble: Aerated Concrete Claims and Coverage
[/vc_custom_heading][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”127252″]Reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (“RAAC”) is a lightweight cementitious material pioneered in Sweden and used extensively in walls and floors of UK buildings from the 1950’s to 1990’s. Mixed without aggregate, RAAC is ‘bubbly’ in texture and much less durable than standard concrete, with an estimated lifespan of 30 years. The air bubbles can promote water ingress, causing decay to the rebar and structural instability.
Read more here. [5][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”,Default”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”189348″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image media=”3180″ media_width_percent=”100″ uncode_shortcode_id=”181765″ media_link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fenchurchlaw.co.uk%2Fpeople%2Fdru-corfield%2F”][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”399263″]
Dru Corfield [6]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading uncode_shortcode_id=”157741″]
Risk, Regulation and Rewards: Regulatory Developments in Artificial Intelligence
[/vc_custom_heading][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”519148″]With the Government’s White Paper consultation – “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation” – having closed at the end of June, and the UK scheduled to host the first global summit on AI regulation at Bletchley Park in early November, now is an appropriate time to assess the regulatory lay-of-the-land in relation to this nascent technology.
Read more here. [7][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”,Default”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”849414″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image media=”3160″ media_width_percent=”100″ uncode_shortcode_id=”941193″ media_link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fenchurchlaw.co.uk%2Fpeople%2Fjonathan-corman%2F”][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”119771″]
Jonathan Corman [8]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading uncode_shortcode_id=”975196″]
Insurance for fees claims: RSA & Ors v Tughans
[/vc_custom_heading][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”207174″]This Court of Appeal decision, in which our firm represented the successful respondents, considered the scope of a professional indemnity policy written on a full “civil liability” basis. Will such a policy respond to a claim against a firm (in this case, a firm of Solicitors) for damages referable to its fee, for which the firm had performed the contractually agreed work, but where the fee was only paid by the client following a misrepresentation by the firm?
Read more here. [9][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”,Default”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”105557″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image media=”3379″ media_width_percent=”100″ uncode_shortcode_id=”187397″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading uncode_shortcode_id=”546941″]
Top 100 cases – The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
[/vc_custom_heading][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”213842″]We continue our “100 Cases Every Policyholder Needs to Know” feature – our opinionated and practical guide to the most important insurance decisions relating to the London/English insurance markets, all looked at from a pro-policyholder perspective. As a reminder, we call them:
· “The Good” – cases that are correctly decided and positive for policyholders.
· “The Bad” – decisions that are bad for policyholders, wrongly decided and in need of being overturned.
· “The Ugly” – cases that can trip up even the most honest policyholder with the most genuine claim. Bad for policyholders but (even to our policyholder-tinted eyes) correctly decidedIn this edition we’re looking at two cases.
The first is an “Ugly one” – MacPhail v Allianz Insurance plc [2023] EWHC 1035 (Ch) – Read here. [10]
The second is a “Good one” – Pan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd – Read here. [11][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”” uncode_shortcode_id=”602250″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_height_percent=”0″ back_color=”color-xsdn” overlay_alpha=”50″ gutter_size=”3″ column_width_percent=”100″ shift_y=”0″ z_index=”0″ uncode_shortcode_id=”402403″ back_color_type=”uncode-palette”][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_custom_heading text_color=”fenchurch-pink” uncode_shortcode_id=”331512″ text_color_type=”uncode-palette”]Team News[/vc_custom_heading][vc_custom_heading uncode_shortcode_id=”160621″]
Chiltern 50 Ultra Challenge
[/vc_custom_heading][vc_single_image media=”3596″ media_width_percent=”100″ alignment=”center” uncode_shortcode_id=”188201″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”920369″]We’re proud to share that on the 23rd of September 2023, employees of Fenchurch Law completed The Chiltern 50 Ultra Challenge.
The Chiltern 50 is a charity walk through the Chiltern Hills, a route that follows the Thames to Henley Bridge, then out into the picturesque countryside on Shakespears Way, Icknield Way, and Chiltern Way. The team walked a total distance of 50km (31 miles), with over 900 metres of climb.
We hit the trails to support MIND, a charity that’s doing incredible work in destigmatizing conversations around mental health and providing essential support to those in need.
A big thanks to everyone who supported us on this journey, if you’d like to donate, please visit our fundraising page here: https://www.justgiving.com/team/fenchurchlaw [12][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_separator sep_color=”” uncode_shortcode_id=”157936″][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”147099″]
And finally…
We want to know your views. If you have a question or an interesting point that you’d like to share about all things insurance related, please let us know by emailing info@fenchurchlaw.co.uk [13][/vc_column_text][uncode_socials][vc_column_text uncode_shortcode_id=”316519″]Follow us[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]