Legal News

Supreme Court interprets matters relating to insurance under Brussels I (recast) (Aspen Underwriting Ltd v Credit Europe Bank)

Supreme Court interprets matters relating to insurance under Brussels I (recast) (Aspen Underwriting Ltd v Credit Europe Bank)
Published on: 03 April 2020
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Supreme Court interprets matters relating to insurance under Brussels I (recast) (Aspen Underwriting Ltd v Credit Europe Bank)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Exclusive jurisdiction clause
  • Matters relating to insurance
  • Protection under Article 14
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: In Aspen Underwriting v Credit Europe Bank NV, the Supreme Court gave detailed consideration to the phrase ‘matters relating to insurance’ from Chapter II section 3 of the Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussels I (recast). The Supreme Court undertook a detailed review of the case law concerning whether a policyholder, insured or beneficiary was always to be entitled to the benefit of s 3 of the regulation, or whether this was dependent on relative economic power. The Supreme Court firmly concluded that if, correctly categorised as a policyholder, insured or beneficiary, then such person would have the protection of s 3. Written by Angharad Parry, barrister, at Twenty Essex. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents