0370 270 6000

R v Financial Services Compensation Scheme, Ex-Parte Geologistics Limited, Court of Appeal, 18 December 2003

24 December 2003
The issues

Policyholders Protection Act 1975 – Insurance – Insolvent Insurer.

The facts

Geologistics had an Employers Liability Policy with the Independent. The claim was made by an employee. Geologistics were unable to recover under the Policy; either the damages payable to the employee, the costs payable to the employee, or the costs incurred defending the claim. Under Section 6(iv) and (v) of the Policyholder’s Protection Act 1975, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme had to indemnify Geologistics for damages and costs for which Geologistics were liable to the employee. The Scheme argued that it did not have to pay the costs that Geologistics had to pay its own Solicitors because it was not a liability arising “in respect of a liability of the Policyholder subject to compulsory insurance” within Section 6(v). The Judge at first instance disagreed. The matter came before the Court of Appeal.

The decision

1. The 1975 Act was not to be construed on the basis that its sole or primary aim was to protect third party victims as opposed to indemnifying corporate policyholders.

2. It was usual for an Employers Liability Policy to cover both damages and Claimants and Defence costs.

3. In this case, the original Policy provided for the recovery of Defence costs. When the Independent became insolvent, those costs were within the meaning of Section 6(v) as incurred in respect of “a liability subject to compulsory insurance” because they were descriptive of the type of liability covered by the Policy.

Appeal dismissed.

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.

View

Blogs

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.

View

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.

View

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.

View

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