No Compensation for Consequential Losses
15th January, 2014
Cases arising from the damage done by rioters during the 2011 riots are now beginning to come to court.
Recently, one such case was decided concerning the extent of the losses covered by the Riot (Damages) Act 1886. The Act provides that compensation will be due where there is damage to a building or its contents by ‘persons riotously and tumultuously assembled together’. In such cases, compensation is paid by the Government.
It was straightforward for the insurers (who otherwise stood to pick up the bill for their policyholders’ claims) to show that the damage was the result of a group of youths which met the definition, as the rioters had looted and burned the property concerned. A claim for more than £49 million was made.
However, the more contentious issue for the claimant insurance companies related to the extent to which they could claim compensation for the policyholders’ loss of profits and rent subsequent to the loss and damage caused directly. Nearly another £4 million was at stake.
The High Court ruled that the companies’ claims were limited to the physical damage to the premises and the property in it. The statute did not cover consequential losses of profit or rent.
Whether this will lead to a hardening of commercial insurance policy rates or wider exclusion clauses remains to be seen, but it is yet another good reason to make sure you fully understand all the clauses in your insurance policies and take advice as needed.
We can advise you on any property-related matter, including the legal effect of clauses in your insurance policies.
For more information please contact Giles Williams on 01244 405578 or email [email protected]
You might also be interested in...
15th May, 2018
Experienced HR leader joins Aaron & Partners LLP Law firm with offices in Chester and Shrewsbury appoints Kate Robertson to drive HR strategy for more than 120 staff and to support the company’s growth Chester law firm Aaron & Partners LLP has strengthened its senior leadership team with the appointment of an experienced human resources manager. Kate Robertson... Read More »
24th April, 2018
Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner at Aaron & Partners LLP, shares her experience and the reasons why we should be cautious before paying so-called “bailiffs” over the phone or online without vetting them first. My neighbour has told me that recently he had a CCJ (County Court Judgment) against him. A day or so later, he received a phone call... Read More »
11th April, 2018
Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner comments on the recent case of Mr A M Coletta v Bath Hill Court – Bournemouth Property Management Ltd UKEAT 0200 17 RN To read the Transcript of Proceedings in full please click here “This case highlights an important aspect of the Statute of Limitations which affects a wider field than employment claims. An... Read More »