Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Ors. v Tughans (a firm)

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Ors. v Tughans (a firm)

The arbitrator had jurisdiction to determine indemnity for the Tughans Fee damages claim as the scope of reference was not strictly limited by the Notice of Arbitration and could be enlarged by pleadings and conduct. However, granting relief for the Tughans Fee damages claim beyond the 'Qualified Claim' (where the fee was unavailable to Tughans) without giving RSA a fair opportunity to respond was a serious irregularity under s.68, requiring remission. On the legal question, a professional indemnity policy does not indemnify for the return of a fee never contractually due, but does indemnify for damages where the insured had accrued a contractual right to the fee, even if obtained by...

Parties
Claimant / Arbitration Respondent: Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Others; Defendant / Arbitration Claimant: Tughans (a firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge (s.67, S.68, S.69) to Arbitral Award / Judgment on Post Award Challenges
Outcome
RSA's s.67 and s.69 applications dismissed; s.68 application allowed and award remitted to arbitrator for limited purposes.
Legal Topics
Professional Indemnity Insurance, Scope of Indemnity, Arbitration Jurisdiction, Serious Irregularity, Error of Law, Solicitors' Practice, Indemnity Principle
Insurance Law Arbitration Professional Negligence Professional Indemnity Insurance Scope of Indemnity Arbitration Jurisdiction Serious Irregularity Error of Law +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Others

Claimant / Arbitration Respondent

Tughans (a firm)

Defendant / Arbitration Claimant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge (s.67, S.68, S.69) to Arbitral Award / Judgment on Post Award Challenges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction to determine indemnity for the Tughans Fee damages claim
  2. 2 Whether there was a serious irregularity under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator made an error of law under s.69 regarding indemnity for fees not contractually due

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator had jurisdiction to determine indemnity for the Tughans Fee damages claim as the scope of reference was not strictly limited by the Notice of Arbitration and could be enlarged by pleadings and conduct. However, granting relief for the Tughans Fee damages claim beyond the 'Qualified Claim' (where the fee was unavailable to Tughans) without giving RSA a fair opportunity to respond was a serious irregularity under s.68, requiring remission. On the legal question, a professional indemnity policy does not indemnify for the return of a fee never contractually due, but does indemnify for damages where the insured had accrued a contractual right to the fee, even if obtained by...

Court Disposition

RSA's s.67 and s.69 applications dismissed; s.68 application allowed and award remitted to arbitrator for limited purposes.

Orders

  • Award remitted to arbitrator to determine if Tughans may pursue indemnity for the Tughans Fee on an unqualified basis and to decide relief for the Qualified Claim.
  • RSA's challenge under s.67 dismissed.