HWL Ebsworth Insurance Review – April 2017

07 April 2017

We are delighted to welcome you to the latest edition of the HWL Ebsworth Insurance Review.

Welcome to the first edition for 2017 of the HWL Ebsworth Insurance Review.

We are pleased to bring you a quarterly series of articles addressing a range of the latest issues and cases from different States and Territories relevant to various lines of business.

We hope you will find this edition of our Insurance Review useful and encourage you to pass it on to any colleagues to whom it would be of interest. If they would like to be added to our mailing list, please contact  marketing@hwle.com.au.

In this edition we review the following topics:

Climate change – should directors consider these risks?

Directors who fail to consider climate-related risks may be liable in the future for breaching the duties of care and diligence they owe to their companies.

To read more click here.

Be aware – head contractor found liable for 40% of a claim

We consider some of the significant repercussions for head contractors who elect not to exercise supervision over a work site, even where they delegate responsibility to competent sub-contractors, after a recent decision handed down by the District Court of Western Australia.

To read more click here.

Insurance issues for carbon capture and storage

In the current debate associated with clean energy finance and the role of coal-fired power stations in maintaining energy security, the process of carbon capture and storage is one option under consideration for facilitating ‘clean coal’. This is relatively new technology, and its installation and operation create novel risks.  In this article we discuss how insurers can effectively handle and assess those risks.

To read more click here.

Plaintiff fails to dodge volenti

The decision of Rakich v Bounce Australia Pty Ltd offers a rare example of a plaintiff failing to recover damages for personal injury due to the operation of the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria.  We consider how, despite this decision, it remains very difficult to prove that a plaintiff subjectively appreciated the full extent of the risks in a given activity and the nature of the ongoing burden on defendants in this regard.

To read more click here.

Risky business of quad bikes at work!

In this article we discuss a recent Tasmanian Supreme Court Judgement which serves as a reminder of the pivotal principles applied in common law claims for personal injury and also of the inherent danger and ongoing risk and exposure to employers who utilise quad bikes in the work place.

To read more click here.

Successfully defending a weak D&O prosecution 

The judgement arising from ASIC’s recent prosecution against Peter Drake and two other directors of LM Investment Management Ltd (LMIM), in the Federal Court decision of Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) v Drake (No. 2) [2016] FCA1552 (ASIC v Drake) offers a useful guide to insurers when defending claims against directors and officers as to how to identify potential weaknesses in a claimant’s case.

To read more click here.

What is a responsible rejection of a Calderbank Offer: Victorian WorkCover Authority v O’Brien

The recent Victorian Supreme Court case of Victorian WorkCover Authority v O’Brien [2017] VSC 68 affirms the relevant factors when assessing the reasonableness of rejecting a Calderbank offer.

To read more click here.

We hope you find this edition informative and insightful.

Subscribe to HWL Ebsworth Publications and Events

HWL Ebsworth regularly publishes articles and newsletters to keep our clients up to date on the latest legal developments and what this means for your business.

To receive these updates via email, please complete the subscription form and indicate which areas of law you would like to receive information on.

Contact us