ARC Capital Partners Ltd v Brit UW Ltd & Anor

ARC Capital Partners Ltd v Brit UW Ltd & Anor

The Retroactive Date Clause excludes only claims directly or indirectly caused by wrongful acts prior to 5th June 2009; the Fund's primary claim relates solely to acts in 2010, so the exclusion does not apply. The letter of 2nd April 2013 did not constitute a written demand for monetary damages or non-pecuniary relief and thus was not a 'Claim' under the policy. Even if it were, the Continuity of Cover Clause (Extension 5j) provides coverage for late notified claims, unaffected by the condition precedent in clause 14.

Parties
Claimant: ARC Capital Partners Limited; Defendant: BRIT UW Limited; Defendant: QBE Underwriting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Insurance Coverage Dispute / Judgment
Outcome
Declarations granted in favour of the Manager.
Legal Topics
Professional Indemnity Insurance, Policy Interpretation, Exclusion Clauses, Notification Requirements
Insurance Law Contract Law Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy Interpretation Exclusion Clauses Notification Requirements

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

Parties

ARC Capital Partners Limited

Claimant

BRIT UW Limited

Defendant

QBE Underwriting Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Insurance Coverage Dispute / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Construction of Retroactive Date Clause
  2. 2 Whether letter of 2nd April 2013 constituted a 'Claim' under the policy
  3. 3 Effect of late notification and Continuity of Cover Clause

Ratio Decidendi

The Retroactive Date Clause excludes only claims directly or indirectly caused by wrongful acts prior to 5th June 2009; the Fund's primary claim relates solely to acts in 2010, so the exclusion does not apply. The letter of 2nd April 2013 did not constitute a written demand for monetary damages or non-pecuniary relief and thus was not a 'Claim' under the policy. Even if it were, the Continuity of Cover Clause (Extension 5j) provides coverage for late notified claims, unaffected by the condition precedent in clause 14.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted in favour of the Manager.

Orders

  • Declaration that the Claim was first made within the Policy Period.
  • Declaration that if the Claim was made by letter dated 2 April 2013, it is covered by the Second Excess Policy by virtue of Extension Clause 5j, and the Defendants are not entitled to decline cover by virtue of Clause 14.