Experience
Prior to my current role, experience includes:
- Acted on behalf of insurers in a circa £1.5m coverage dispute issued in the Technology and Construction Court (London) following the sinking of a linkspan/pontoon. The defence required determining the proximate cause of the sinking (which necessitated input from a number of experts, including naval architects and metallurgists) and whether insurers were estopped the challenging the cause. The case was successfully resolved at a mediation following the disclosure phase of litigation.
- Acted on behalf of lead insurers of a specialist piling subcontractor in the defence of a circa £1.3m claim issued in the Technology and Construction Court (Manchester) following an escape of concrete during major construction works (demolition and subsequent redevelopment). The case required determining the precise causal mechanism of damage to third party property and causal potency as between the main contractor and subcontractor, and analysing myriad contractual arrangements which had blurred the respective obligations on the parties.
- Advised insurers on a breadth of coverage and policy indemnity issues which has included joint insurance issues, design defect exclusions, aggregation, warranties and conditions precedent, contractual liability and financial loss extensions, and claims conditions.
- Acted on behalf of insurers in a subrogated recovery claim following a fire caused by a defect in the void of a stud wall which had been introduced during recently completed refurbishment works at an ultra-high net worth individual’s residential property in London with losses exceeding £1m. The case was settled on terms favourable to insurers by way of without prejudice negotiations with the main contractor.
- Acted on behalf of insurers in the defence of a multi-million pound coverage dispute following a fire at mixed use residence. The policy had been deemed void for material non-disclosure.
- Acted on behalf of insurers in a subrogated recovery claim following substantial damage to a high-tech marketing suite. Despite the main target’s insurers having declined cover, the case was settled on terms favourable to insurers shortly after a mediation.