Creditors Protected by Court of Appeal

A recent case has confirmed that a clause in a contract which absolves one party from paying the other in the event that the second party becomes insolvent is invalid as it infringes the ‘anti-deprivation’ principle.

The principle exists to protect creditors of insolvent people and businesses, who would otherwise face increased losses if the insolvent party no longer had a right to enforce its debts.

In the case in point, a man was injured in an accident involving a lorry owned by a haulage company. The haulage firm’s insurers declined to pay on the ground that the accident was not covered under the policy terms. The injured man sued the haulage firm and the driver of the lorry and won. The haulage firm sued its insurance broker for negligence in arranging the insurance policy on the ground that the risk should have been insured.

The haulage company went into liquidation. Its agreement with the insurance broker contained an indemnity from the broker. However, the terms of the indemnity stated that should the company become insolvent, the broker’s indemnity would be invalid. The insurance broker argued that the indemnity was merely an agreement to indemnify, not an asset per se, and thus the company’s insolvency released it from its obligation to pay.

The Court of Appeal rejected the argument, holding that it would be a breach of the anti-deprivation principle.

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.

Ask a free legal question

Complete this simple form if you
would like to ask us a
free legal question
 

What Our Clients Say

We would like to thank you for the superb work and attention to detail that has gone into our dispute with the council so far! 

Our Architect put together a very professional document which was further enhanced and polished by your very professional input. 

You are in fact unique in my personal experience of the legal profession in that you take your duty of care very seriously. It is obvious that the outcome concerns you greatly and your determination to win is much appreciated!

Thank you from us both. 

Best Regards
 
Mr and Mrs X, Surrey