Greene Wood & McLean LLP v Templeton Insurance Ltd

Greene Wood & McLean LLP v Templeton Insurance Ltd

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether a term should be implied into the agreement between GWM and Templeton that Templeton would meet valid claims under the ATE policy. The claim for contribution is in respect of a contract governed by English law, and GWM and Templeton are arguably liable for the same damage, satisfying the requirements of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Greene Wood & McLean LLP; Respondent/appellant: Templeton Insurance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
GWM's appeal allowed in relation to the contractual claim; Templeton's appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
After the Event (ate) Insurance, Contribution Claims, Implied Terms in Contracts, Jurisdiction to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Insurance Law Civil Procedure After the Event (ate) Insurance Contribution Claims Implied Terms in Contracts Jurisdiction to Serve Out of Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Greene Wood & McLean LLP

Appellant/respondent

Templeton Insurance Limited

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether GWM had a direct contractual claim against Templeton under the ATE insurance arrangements
  2. 2 Whether GWM could claim contribution from Templeton under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 for the same damage
  3. 3 Whether the claim for contribution was 'in respect of a contract' for purposes of CPR 6.20(5)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether a term should be implied into the agreement between GWM and Templeton that Templeton would meet valid claims under the ATE policy. The claim for contribution is in respect of a contract governed by English law, and GWM and Templeton are arguably liable for the same damage, satisfying the requirements of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978.

Court Disposition

GWM's appeal allowed in relation to the contractual claim; Templeton's appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to serve Templeton out of the jurisdiction in respect of the contribution claim is upheld.
  • The claim relying on a direct contract between GWM and Templeton is reinstated for trial.