0370 270 6000

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group, Court of Appeal

20 November 2002
The issues

Appeals – challenge to factual findings – Appeal practice.

The facts

The Defendant appealed against the Judgment of Morrison J in the Commercial Court. The Appeal challenged the Judge’s factual findings or conclusions.

The decision

1. The Appeal would be dismissed.

2. Under the new Provisions (Civil Procedure Rules 52.11 (1)) every Appeal was limited to review of the lower Court’s decision and not a re-hearing, unless the Court decided otherwise.

3. Where an Appellate Court was asked to reverse findings of fact based on the credibility of witnesses, the approach should be the same whether the Appeal was by way of review or re-hearing. The approach would be dependent on the type of issue that the Judge had had to decide.

4. Here the Judge had seen the witnesses and had been able to assess their credibility against the documents. This was a considerable advantage. The approach of the Appellate Court should be the same in this kind of course, whether it was conducting a review or a re-hearing.

5. The difference would be of considerable importance where the Court was asked to consider the exercise of a discretion by the Judge below (Audergon -v- La Baguette Limited) but in a case where the factual findings of a Judge were challenged, the decision whether to hold a re-hearing or review by the Appellate Court would make little practical difference.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up