- Insured’s right to reinstatement indemnity dependent upon a clear intention to reinstate
- Original news
- How did the issue of ‘loss of value’ versus a ‘reinstatement’ indemnity arise?
- The Mercantile Court’s decision
- Insurers’ appeal to the Court of Appeal
- What did the Court of Appeal decide?
- What is the significance of the Court of Appeal’s decision?
- How does this fit with previous case law?
- What are the practical implications for property insurers and insurance lawyers?
Property analysis: Bob Moxon Browne QC and Lucas Fear-Segal, both of 2 Temple Gardens, who were counsel for the appellant insurers in the Great Lakes Reinsurance case, examine the Court of Appeal’s approach to the correct measure of an insurance indemnity after the destruction by fire of a derelict Grade II listed building of limited intrinsic value.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial