UK: Insurance And Reinsurance Weekly Update - 9th October 2012

Last Updated: 16 October 2012
Article by Nigel Brook

Welcome to the thirty-fifth edition of Clyde & Co's (Re)insurance and litigation caselaw weekly updates for 2012.

These updates are aimed at keeping you up to speed and informed of the latest developments in caselaw relevant to your practice.

This week's caselaw

STANNARD v GORE

The Rylands v Fletcher principle and whether a special rule exists in fire cases - of possible interest to liability insurers

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1248.html

The case of Rylands v Fletcher established the principle that where a person, for his own purposes, brings onto his land something likely to do mischief if it escapes, he will be strictly liable for the natural consequences of its escape, if it does escape. The issue in this case was how the principle applies to cases where damage is caused by the "escape" of fire. In this case, a fire on the defendant's premises was fed by the ignition of a stack of tyres on his land and then spread to the neighbouring claimant's premises. At first instance, it was held that the requirements of Rylands v Fletcher were satisfied and the defendant appealed. The Court of Appeal has now unanimously allowed that appeal.

Ward LJ concluded that in an appropriate case, damage caused by fire emanating from an adjoining property can fall within the Rylands v Fletcher rule. However, the appropriate case is likely to be very rare, because the rule requires a "thing" (and not the fire itself) to be brought onto property and starting a fire on one's land may well be an ordinary use of the land: "While fire may be a dangerous thing, the occasions when fire as such is brought onto the land may be limited to cases where the fire has been deliberately or negligently started by the occupier". In this case, tyres are not exceptionally dangerous in themselves and they did not escape - the recorder at first instance had been wrong to conclude that it was the escape of fire which brought this case within Rylands v Fletcher. Accordingly, the claim failed and Ward LJ cautioned: The moral of the story is ... make sure you have insurance cover for losses occasioned by fire on your premises".

Lewison LJ went even further in holding that strict liability would only arise if a fire is started deliberately: "A fire that starts accidentally and which damages the place where it begins can hardly be said to have brought on to the land by the occupier "for his own purposes". Nor in my judgment can he be said without straining language to have brought the fire onto the land at all". An occupier of land will only be liable to his neighbour if a fire begins accidentally but he negligently fails to prevent its spread.

TINSELTIME LTD v ROBERTS & ORS

Whether court should make non-party costs order against solicitor acting under a CFA

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2012/2628.html

Following a strike out of its claim, a claimant was ordered to pay the other side's costs. The claimant went into insolvent liquidation and the defendants therefore sought a non-party costs order against the claimant's solicitor. That solicitor had acted for the claimant under a conditional fee arrangement ("CFA") and no after the event ("ATE") insurance policy had been put in place. The defendants sought to rely on the case of Flatman v Germany & Ors (see Weekly Update 40/11) in which Eady J ordered disclosure of the losing claimant's funding arrangements (in order to help the defendants bring a non-party costs order against the claimant's solicitors). Davies HHJ held as follows:

  1. A non-party costs order would be made against a solicitor only if he/she acted beyond his/her role as a solicitor. The fact that he/she is acting under a CFA is not sufficient in itself to justify the order. The position is no different where the solicitor knows that the client is impecunious and no ATE policy is in place.
  2. In the majority of cases where a costs order would be appropriate there must be either: (a) some financial benefit to the solicitor over and above the benefit from the CFA; and/or (b) some exercise of control of the litigation over and above that which would be expected from a solicitor acting on behalf of a client.
  3. An example where an order would be justified would be where the damages being claimed are modest compared to the costs already incurred "so that the client had for all practical purposes lost any real interest in the pursuit of the proceedings but the solicitor was wedded to pursuing them to recover his costs". Where ATE cover is not taken out it may be possible to conclude that the solicitor knew that the case was obviously weak and so was pursuing it for his/her own financial benefit. However, each case is fact-specific.
  4. It will be impermissible to seek to justify an order on the basis that the solicitor has acted improperly, unreasonably or negligently - instead, a wasted costs order should be sought.

The judge concluded that a non-party costs order against the solicitor would not be justified in this case. There was no evidence that the solicitor knew that an ATE policy could not be obtained because the case was so weak. Furthermore, there was contemporaneous evidence to support the view that the solicitor was not motivated solely by financial self-interest in taking on the case, "but with the laudable aim of providing access to justice" (eg there was a file note recording that the claimant had been "crippled by the defendant tortfeasors and needs assistance").

Finally, the judge noted that even if an order had been justified, he would have limited the solicitor's liability to the amount which he had expended on disbursements (in part because the solicitor had never been warned that this application might be made against him).

SANDHU v SIDHU

Application for non-party disclosure/balancing act of the court

The claimant sought an order for disclosure against a non-party to the proceedings. Norris J noted that such orders "are not routinely made; they are exceptional". In this case, the following orders were sought:

  1. Additional documents and metadata relating to a particular document (metadata is the unseen information contained within an electronic document, such as the time and date of creation and what amendments have been made. Parties generally only seek disclosure of metadata where fraud is suspected). The judge noted that the consequences of ordering the disclosure of the metadata would involve little work for the non-party. However, disclosure of the other documents would require him to "down tools" and attend to the order (as opposed to dealing with his clients). He would have to undertake "some burdensome work". The judge held that the consequences of ordering disclosure were more serious than the consequences of not ordering disclosure. In particular, the application had been made very late and the defendant to the claim faced the risk of imprisonment.
  2. Disclosure from solicitors who had acted for the defendant in separate litigation. Again, the key question was what was involved in meeting the claimant's request. Here, the judge thought that little would be involved because the documents had already been identified and were readily available (and privileged content could be redacted). The judge therefore granted the order for this disclosure and ordered the claimant to lodge £250 with his solicitor as security for the costs of the solicitors complying with the order (the claimant having previously disobeyed costs orders).

MALLON v HALLIWELLS

Date for assessment of damages in a solicitors' negligence case

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1212.html&query=title+(+mallon+and+halliwells+)&method=boolean

Clyde & Co for respondent

The general rule is that damages are assessed at the date of the breach of a duty, unless justice requires some other date to be taken. In this case, the Court of Appeal decided that another date was more appropriate. The defendant solicitors were negligent in failing to include in an agreement which they drafted a clause to the effect that the claimant would be entitled to the proceeds from the sale of a development. At first instance, the judge assessed damages not at the date of the agreement (2005) but after the date when the claimant became aware of the omission of the clause (autumn 2008, by which time there had been a marked deterioration in the property market - thus the claimant's right to the proceeds of sale was worth far less). The claimant appealed, arguing that the value of his right should have been assessed as at 2005.

The Court of Appeal held that the purpose of an award of damages is to "compensate the loser, not to provide him with a windfall on hypothetical facts". On the facts, the claimant would not have sought to realise the value of his asset before he actually did (in 2008). The judge was not therefore wrong to adopt that date and only nominal damages should be awarded.

LANGSAM v BEACHCROFT LLP & ORS

Duty of solicitor when counsel are instructed

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1230.html

The claimant brought a professional negligence claim against his solicitors for allegedly giving excessively cautious advice on the settlement of his claim against a third party. The solicitors argued that they had followed advice from leading counsel. The judge at first instance found that a solicitor does not abdicate his responsibility when instructing counsel - he/ she can either advise jointly with counsel or he/she must carry on a "whistleblower role". The solicitor will be liable if counsel's advice is obviously and glaringly wrong (and the solicitor's judgment must be informed by his or her specialist expertise). On appeal, the claimant sought to raise the following arguments:

  1. A solicitor remains under a positive duty to give advice once leading counsel has been instructed. The Court of Appeal held that this was not a case where the solicitor was using leading counsel to "frank his own advice". As a matter of fact, this was not a case of joint advice. Furthermore, "the fact that a solicitor gives advice consistent with the advice previously given by leading counsel when leading counsel is not present does not mean that he has accepted an independent duty and that the relationship has changed from what it was when leading counsel gave his advice".
  2. A solicitor owes a duty to indicate the spectrum of the loss he might recover, not simply put a figure at the bottom end of the bracket. The Court of Appeal rejected that submission too. This would be an "over-prescriptive approach". A solicitor's advice is not negligent just because it does not give a more optimistic view of what might be recovered at trial.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Nigel Brook
 
In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.