0203 488 0169
enquiries@amrak.co.uk

Search

Home
About Us
ATE Insurance
Contact
Log In

Home
About Us
ATE Insurance
Contact
Log In

Home » Clinical Negligence ATE Premium Recovery

Search

Join mailing List

Clinical Negligence ATE Premium Recovery

July 2, 2020

After a long-awaited outcome, July 2019 finally saw The Court of Appeal rule that block rated premiums are recoverable from an opponent in clinical negligence cases.

West v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust and Demouilpied v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

After a long-awaited outcome, July 2019 finally saw The Court of Appeal rule that block rated premiums are recoverable from an opponent in clinical negligence cases.

A block rated premium is a premium that is not calculated according to individual each risk but a premium applied (usually via a delegated authority scheme) to a broad risk of cases.

Such challenges were not unusual pre-LASPO where premiums were recovered from opponents for all cases but since LASPO such challenges are rare.

The defendants, in this case, relied on proportionality arguments amongst others stating that the ATE premiums of £5088.00 were disproportionate to the clients claim for damages. In the West case, the damages were £10,000 and the Demouilpied case the damages were £4500.00.

The Court of Appeal had to consider whether those premiums were unreasonable or dis-proportionate.

In a joint judgment, all three Judges concluded that the premiums were reasonable and, having found the premiums to be reasonable the Judges then stated that the premiums could not then be considered to be disproportionate.

This is welcome news for Clinical negligence victims and ATE insurers alike who have continually argued that ATE premiums are calculated according to the amount the policy pays out (burn cost) and not linked to the level of damages.

Had the Court of Appeal decision gone against, it would have removed Access to Justice for many of the 10,000 or so clinical negligence victims each year.

The Court of Appeal went to great lengths to recognise and understand the complexities of ATE Insurance and this was done with the aid of Mr Justice Kerr and Master Leonard sitting as Assessors.

click below to read a full copy of the Judgment

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1220.html

One Response

domniktagliarini1986 says:

07/09/2024 at 5:09 pm

wow!! 105Solicitor Ordered to pay £50,000 for ATE Advice failure

Reply

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Share:

Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

More Posts

Solicitors and Insurance Brokers

Solicitor Ordered to pay £50,000 for ATE Advice failure

Solicitor ordered to pay £50,000 for failing to advise a client about ATE

Herbert v HH Law – How is your success fee? …

Court of Appeal rules against firms charging 100% success fee in low-value Personal Injury claims.

Send Us A Message

Full Name

Phone

Email

NextHerbert v HH Law – How is your success fee? …Next

Head Office

PO Box 269 Widnes Cheshire WA8 2EP
0203 488 0169
enquiries@amrak.co.uk

Site Links

Home
ATE Insurance
What is ATE Insurance?
Legal News
Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ’s
Log In
Elementor #4961

Home
ATE Insurance
What is ATE Insurance?
Legal News
Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ’s
Log In
Elementor #4961

AMRAK (Europe) Limited Company No. 10883825 is an appointed representative of Premier Insurance Consultants Ltd who are authorised and regulated by the FCA (No. 307128).

Ⓒ 2020 - All Rights Are Reserved

Discover more from ATE Legal Expenses Insurance

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Home
ATE Insurance
What is ATE Insurance?
Legal News
Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ’s
Log In
Elementor #4961

Home
ATE Insurance
What is ATE Insurance?
Legal News
Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ’s
Log In
Elementor #4961

Join Mailing List

Forename

Surname

Company

Email

Tel