Proximate Causation in Insurance Law
Year: 2005
Type: article
Abstract: The recent decision in Midland Mainline v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd, has returned the Court of Appeal to some thorny questions concerning causation in insurance contracts. The case resulted from the Hat¢eld rail disaster in 2000 in which four people diedwhen a trainwas derailed by a broken track. Following the crash, Railtrack plc, the operator of the track, decided to impose emergency speed restrictions (ESRs) across those parts of the rail networkwhere therewas a possibilityof a similar incident. This led to disruptions in trains and as a consequence rail companies suiered losses.These companies sought to recover the losses from policies covering business interruption.The policy before the court excluded liability for loss caused by ‘inherent vice, latent defect, gradual deterioration, wear and tear, frost, change in water table level, its own faultyor defective design ormaterials’.The insurers denied liability for the companies’ losses on the ground that the cause of the loss was wear and tear of the track and that, since this was excluded, they were not liable.
Source: Modern Law Review
Authors: John Lowry, Philip Rawlings
Institutions: University College London, Queen Mary University of London
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1980288781