Subjects:

Insurance Law

The Law of Insurance Contracts is widely regarded as the book practitioners turn to for detailed authoritative solutions to their problems. The book has been extensively revised and updated to ensure that you are kept informed with all the latest developments in insurance law. This former British Insurance Law Association prize-winner is highly detailed but with a practical content. The easy to read style guarantees the reader quick solutions to the common day-to-day questions.

The new edition of this highly-regarded book provides an exhaustive guide to insurance contract law, including:

• Coverage of all non-marine insurance contracts from proposal to expiry stage
• Detailed notes that you can cite in court
• Ease of layout and practical approach makes it convenient to refer to
• Complete coverage of the UK, plus other major common law jurisdictions
• Fully referenced featuring the most up to date cases in Insurance Law

• Goshawk v Tyler (CA) concerning the obligation of brokers to disclose clients’ documents to underwriters
• BP v Aon concerning the liability of brokers in tort to third parties, in particular to clients of associated companies of brokers
• Johnson v Medical Defence Union (2006) suggesting grounds for challenging the manner in which a decision not to renew was reached under the Data protection Act 1998
• Proforce Recruit v Rugby Group (CA 2006) on interpretation by reference to contract negotiations as part of the matrix or background of the contract
• Bolton v Municipal Mutual (CA 2006) liability cover for ‘accidental bodily injury or illness’ and the associated decision of the House of Lords in 2006 in Barker v Corus KP v Royal Sun Alliance concerning the application of a policy exception of liability for injury or damage "which results from a deliberate act or omission of the insured" in the case of persons guilty of physical and sexual abuse of children in their care
• Observations in Sowerby v Charlton (CA) concerning admissions of liability by a liability policyholder after action had been brought, in respect of which the court has a discretion under CPR 14.1(5) to allow the admission to be amended or withdrawn.