I - Insurance regulation
5/9/23
R (ON THE APPLICATION OF MANCHIKALAPATI) v THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPENSATION SCHEME
An insurer’s liability for interest and costs under a court judgment in favour of the policyholders, was not a claim under the insurance policy to which the claim related. Since the policy did not provide for the recovery of those sums, the FSCS was not liable under the relevant scheme rules to provide compensation to the policyholders when the insurer became insolvent and unable to pay the interest and costs.
13/3/13
IN THE MATTER OF DIGITAL SATELLITE WARRANTY COVER LTD v FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY [2013] UKSC 7
Winding-up orders had properly been made against the appellants for undertaking insurance business without FSA authorisation. The fact that EU Insurance Directive 73/239 did not specifically require regulation of businesses providing the kind of extended warranty contract offered by the appellant did not prevent Member States from regulating such business. The contracts sold by the appellant were insurance contracts at common law and for the purpose of the Financial Services & Markets Act (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 as contracts which brought about a result which the insured would otherwise have to achieve by payment and which protected the insured from financial loss.
25/07/12
GOODMAN v CENTRAL CAPITAL LTD [2012] EWHC B8 (Mercantile)
No breach of ICOB rules proved in sale of PPI.