Will the Supreme Court’s ruling in Teal spell the end for the hold harmless fiction?
In an appeal from Teal Assurance v WE Berkeley Insurance  Lloyd’s Rep IR 315, heard in mid-June 2013, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to consider and perhaps jettison the hold harmless fiction, which forms the current basis of liability of insurers in indemnity policies. Although the fiction has little to recommend it, the implications of its removal for the ability of assureds to obtain damages for late payment by their insurers merit consideration.
The ‘hold harmless’ principle is a legal fiction that characterises an insurer’s obligation as a promise to protect the assured from loss from an insured peril. But this is an obligation the insurer cannot fulfil: in reality, the insurer cannot prevent the occurrence of an insured peril (for example the sinking of a ship or a factory fire). The fiction also contradicts ordinary perceptions of the function of insurance (i.e. to compensate the assured for loss resulting from an insured event)…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the 7KBW 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.