Phillips v Syndicate 992 Gunner & Ors

Phillips v Syndicate 992 Gunner & Ors

The insurer is contractually bound to indemnify the employer in respect of the material contribution made by its negligence during the period of cover. Condition 6 does not justify a rateable reduction for successive policies, and no custom or necessity exists to imply such a term. The claimant is entitled to judgment for the full amount due for the period covered by the defendants’ policy.

Parties
Claimant: Sylvia Phillips (Widow & Executrix of the Estate of Arthur Phillips, Deceased); Defendants: Syndicate 992 Gunner and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Mesothelioma Claims, Indemnity Under Insurance Contracts, Third Parties (rights Against Insurers) Act 1930
Insurance Law Tort Law Employer's Liability Mesothelioma Claims Indemnity Under Insurance Contracts Third Parties (rights Against Insurers) Act 1930

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

Sylvia Phillips (Widow & Executrix of the Estate of Arthur Phillips, Deceased)

Claimant

Syndicate 992 Gunner and Others

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the insurer's liability is limited to a proportionate share based on the period of insurance or extends to full indemnity for the period of cover in mesothelioma cases
  2. 2 Whether condition 6 of the employer’s liability policy or custom/practice justifies a rateable reduction in liability for successive insurance periods

Ratio Decidendi

The insurer is contractually bound to indemnify the employer in respect of the material contribution made by its negligence during the period of cover. Condition 6 does not justify a rateable reduction for successive policies, and no custom or necessity exists to imply such a term. The claimant is entitled to judgment for the full amount due for the period covered by the defendants’ policy.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Defendants to pay the outstanding balance of £56,375 plus interest under the judgment.