Malicious prosecution divides Privy Council
By Christopher Russell
It is a frequent and necessary function of the law to create a balance between competing and conflicting desirable aims. Three such are: (1) no wrong should go without remedy; (2) there should be an end to litigation; and (3) there should be no deterrence from bringing justified proceedings. These, in some respects conflicting, policies lie at the heart of the recent decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, on appeal from the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal, in Crawford Adjusters v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman) Ltd  UKPC.
The appeal was decided by the narrowest of margins — 3:2 — and led to a sharp and, in judicial terms, at times acrimonious difference of views between the judges. In short, the majority, led by Lord Wilson, with Lady Hale and Lord Kerr, held that the tort of malicious prosecution is not, as had been the law of England (and Cayman) for centuries, confined to the prosecution of criminal offences (and a small disparate collection of civil claims) but is available as a tort generally and extends to all civil claims.
All three principles arose starkly in the Sagicor case, of which the facts were as follows: hurricane damage was insured against by the proprietors of a Cayman residential complex with the respondent to the appeal (Sagicor). Hurricane Ivan, in 2004, caused extensive damage to the complex, and the proprietors claimed on the insurance. Sagicor appointed a local loss adjustor (Mr Paterson); on his advice, CI$2.9m (£2.15m) advance payments were made by Sagicor to Hurlstone, the construction company engaged to carry out the repair work. A newly appointed senior vice-president of Sagicor (Mr Delessio) became concerned about the amount of the payments to Hurlstone, and what he saw as the lack of supporting documentation. Sagicor retained a different loss adjustor, from England, who valued the work done by Hurlstone at CI$0.8m of which CI$0.7m was the responsibility of Sagicor…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Appleby briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Appleby
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Appleby
Bermuda’s legal framework facilitates the creation of flexible and economically viable co-investment vehicles within a stable and business-friendly jurisdiction.
Feltham v Bouskell provides a cautionary tale for lawyers regarding the need to act quickly upon the receipt of instructions from elderly or ill clients.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Offshore law firms have long supplemented their legal offerings with fiduciary business, but will that model last?
Business is booming in the Isle of Man, a small jurisdiction that thinks big