Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I wonder if that is "clarity" for the time being - pending further appeal. I am sure this is not the end of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Finally turning full circle after insurers had tried to create a fallacy of a disease only being initiated once it is visible. I think they will find it necessary to change the law now if they wish to wriggle out of liability. Given my past exposure I can think of no more Right decision
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
For once it seems as if the legal profession has used common sense. It has been known for many years that it is exposure to the acm that leads to the disease. Knowing the insurers they will appeal and try and get out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
jde
No appeal on this as it is a Supreme Court decision. A landmark and was raised in general conversation by a barrister today and recognised as an important landmark bringing reality back to the insurers. For too long hav insurers tried to slide out of responsibility for employees of defunct companies by trying to claim it is covered only by current insurance policies of existing companies. Its a bit like taking profits even when a company is known to be bankrupt. Perhaps there is a case for malfeasance of directors here? I bet Company House do not follow it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.