The Russian Aircraft Litigation - Operator Policy Claims (Rev1) [2026] EWHC 1134 (Comm) (13 May 2026)

The Russian Aircraft Litigation - Operator Policy Claims (Rev1) [2026] EWHC 1134 (Comm) (13 May 2026)

Chubb and Fidelis, as LP insurers, cannot maintain direct contribution or indemnity claims against the WRUs (OP insurers) because their payments did not discharge the WRUs' liability to the insureds; the correct remedy is subrogation. The liabilities are not co-ordinate as in double insurance, but primary (WRUs) and secondary (LP insurers), so contribution is not available. The applications to strike out or for summary judgment are granted.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 1134 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Chubb European Group SE; Claimant: Fidelis Insurance Ireland DAC; Defendant: CMS Defendants; Defendant: HFW Defendants; Defendant: Shoosmiths Defendants
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Litigation (insurance Contribution Claims) / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment on Contribution Claims
Outcome
Applications to strike out and/or for summary judgment granted; contribution claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Contribution Between Insurers, Double Insurance, Subrogation, Indemnity and Reimbursement, Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978, Primary and Secondary Liability
Insurance Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contribution Between Insurers Double Insurance Subrogation Indemnity and Reimbursement Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978 +1 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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chubb European Group SE

Claimant

Fidelis Insurance Ireland DAC

Claimant

CMS Defendants

Defendant

HFW Defendants

Defendant

Shoosmiths Defendants

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Litigation (insurance Contribution Claims) / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment on Contribution Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether LP insurers (Chubb and Fidelis) can claim direct contribution/indemnity from OP insurers (WRUs) or are limited to subrogated claims
  2. 2 Whether payments by LP insurers discharge the liability of OP insurers to the insureds
  3. 3 Whether the claims fall within the doctrine of double insurance or are governed by principles of primary/secondary liability and subrogation

Ratio Decidendi

Chubb and Fidelis, as LP insurers, cannot maintain direct contribution or indemnity claims against the WRUs (OP insurers) because their payments did not discharge the WRUs' liability to the insureds; the correct remedy is subrogation. The liabilities are not co-ordinate as in double insurance, but primary (WRUs) and secondary (LP insurers), so contribution is not available. The applications to strike out or for summary judgment are granted.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out and/or for summary judgment granted; contribution claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Contribution claims by Chubb and Fidelis against the WRUs (Applicants) are struck out and/or dismissed.
  • Costs to be determined.