Rathbone Brothers Plc & Anor v Novae Corporate Underwriting Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1464 (14 November 2014)

Rathbone Brothers Plc & Anor v Novae Corporate Underwriting Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1464 (14 November 2014)

The policy covered PEV as a paid employee/consultant for personal trustee acts; the excess clause did not require exhaustion of a co-insured's indemnity; and the insurers were not entitled to subrogation against Rathbone under the indemnity, as a term to that effect was implied to reflect the parties' intentions and commercial purpose.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Civ 1464
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Rathbone Brothers PLC; Appellant/respondent: Michael Paul Egerton-Vernon; Respondent/appellant: Novae Corporate Underwriting Limited (on its own behalf and on behalf of all the Members of Lloyd's Syndicate 2007 for the 2008 year of account) & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part; High Court judgment varied.
Legal Topics
Professional Indemnity Insurance, Policy Construction, Subrogation, Excess Clauses, Co Insured Indemnities
Insurance Law Commercial Law Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy Construction Subrogation Excess Clauses Co Insured Indemnities

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rathbone Brothers PLC

Appellant/respondent

Michael Paul Egerton-Vernon

Appellant/respondent

Novae Corporate Underwriting Limited (on its own behalf and on behalf of all the Members of Lloyd's Syndicate 2007 for the 2008 year of account) & Ors

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether PEV was covered by the professional indemnity policy when acting as a personal trustee
  2. 2 Whether the excess clause required exhaustion of indemnity from Rathbone before insurance liability
  3. 3 Whether the insurers had a right of subrogation against Rathbone under the indemnity

Ratio Decidendi

The policy covered PEV as a paid employee/consultant for personal trustee acts; the excess clause did not require exhaustion of a co-insured's indemnity; and the insurers were not entitled to subrogation against Rathbone under the indemnity, as a term to that effect was implied to reflect the parties' intentions and commercial purpose.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part; High Court judgment varied.

Orders

  • PEV is covered by the policy for acts as personal trustee.
  • Excess insurers cannot require exhaustion of the Rathbone indemnity before liability attaches under the policy.