The bankruptcy of Sean Quin, the founder of Quinn Insurance was annulled on the basis that he had failed to disclose that he held an Irish passport and was a registered voter in the Republic of Ireland where he paid 20% of his taxes. This will permit his creditors to pursue him for debts alleged to be owed including Anglo Irish Bank which is claiming more than €2 billion.
|
A car passenger could not claim under the Motor Insurers' Bureau Agreement after he had been injured while in possession of cannabis with an intent to supply, as the vehicle was being used in the course or furtherance of a crime within cl. 6 (1) (e) (iii) of the Agreement and "crime" was not restricted to "serious crime".
|
The terms of a settlement agreement in a Tomlin order could be enforced without lifting the stay and without the need to issue fresh proceedings. The decision of the Court of Appeal in Hollingsworth v Humphrey did not address declarations, specific performance or damages other than under contract. Whether its impact was limited to the RSC and did not apply to the CPR did not need to be determined.
|
Following a claim under a household insurance policy in respect of subsidence damage the homeowner made an offer to settle before issuing proceedings. The letter stated that the offer was made pursuant to Part 36 and remained open for acceptance for 21 days after which it could only be accepted if costs were agreed or the court gave permission. The offer was not accepted within the 21 day period and proceedings were issued. Five months later insurers purported to accept the offer. The homeowner ...
|
The Black and Veatch insurance programme consisted of a tower of insurance contracts providing it with worldwide cover for any one claim (and in annual aggregate) of US$60 million in excess of the deductible and self insured retention. The first layer was written by Lexington Insurance. Above this were three further layers of excess of loss insurance written by Black and Veatch's captive insurer Teal. There was then a 'top and drop' policy for an additional cover of up to £10 million per claim o ...
|
Insurers were not estopped from raising a new allegation of breach of warranty some 7 years after the original letter of declinature and where proceedings had already taken place against brokers. At no stage did the insurers' correspondence or conduct give rise individually or cumulatively the essential unequivocal representation required for estoppel by representation.
|
The FSA published a press release announcing it had secured interim injunctions and freezing orders at the High Court against nine firms, including St Clair Estates Ltd, OFG Investments Ltd, Option Land UK Ltd, and GIG Properties Ltd. The injunctions prohibit the firms from selling plots of land on a specific site at Winkleigh Airfield in Devon pending further investigation by the FSA. The FSA suspects the firms were running a land banking operation which amounted to an unauthorised collective i ...
|
Mr Sidhu, a management consultant, has been found guilty at Southwark Crown Court of 22 counts of insider dealing. He has been sentenced to two years' imprisonment. The FSA brought the case against Mr Sidhu and announced in February 2011 that he had been charged. The offences were committed between 15 May 2009 and 22 August 2009.
|
Mr Ahuja, a former UBS client adviser has been banned and fined £150,000 by the FSA for failing to act with integrity, in breach of Principle 1 of the Statements of Principle and for not being a fit and proper person. Mr Ahuja has also been prohibited from performing any function in relation to any regulated activity in the financial services industry. Mr Ahuja was a client adviser within UBS' international wealth management business in London. Between 1 January 2006 and 30 January 2008 he used ...
|
The Complaints Commissioner rejected a complaint brought against the FSA on 3 September 2011 regarding the findings of the FSA's Unfair Contract Terms Team. The commissioner was satisfied that the FSA had conducted an extensive investigation into whether the terms of an agreement between Firm A and Firm B were unfair and took a course of action which appeared appropriate and reasonable in all the circumstances.In a second complaint on 12 September 2011 regarding the late submission of an adminis ...
|
| 1 |