If employers take only one thing out of the sacking of one of Australia’s best rugby players it should be this – in certain circumstances, an employer does have an interest, and the right to be interested, in an employee’s behaviour outside of the workplace.
Ashley-Jayne Lodge
Most who run businesses that are exposed to environmental risks such as farming and heavy industry have long been aware of the importance of holding relevant and realistic public liability and statutory liability insurance coverage.
The Limitation Act and limitation deadlines for filing court proceedings for insurance claims has been increasingly relevant since the six year anniversary of the Canterbury Earthquakes.
Obtaining an insurance policy and paying the premiums is only the first step to ensuring that your business has insurance cover when it needs it. An often overlooked or at least underestimated aspect is that the typical liability insurance policy has specific requirements about notifying your insurer of a potential ...
2016 saw the 6 year anniversary of the 4 September earthquake and many insurers granted further time to property owners to bring claims. A number of those deadlines are looming again as at 4 September 2017 and this may impact on property owners and their ability to pursue insurance claims.
In this case, the insured (Skyward) owned an earthquake damaged property within the red zone. Skyward accepted CERA’s offer to purchase the land, leaving Skyward to take up the matter of its earthquake damaged 1900’s villa with Tower Insurance. The outcome may surprise you.
The outcome of the Ridgecrest v IAG case proved to be beneficial for both insurers and insured alike. Since the Christchurch earthquakes many questions have been raised around replacement insurance cover and the entitlements due, particularly for commercial properties.
In this article we review a recent Court case concerning insurance and EQC cover for red zoned properties facing rockfall risk and assess whether a different approach might result in a successful claim.
On 5 April 2013 Justice Asher issued judgment in the case O'Loughlin v Tower Insurance. The decision was eagerly awaited.
It was represented as a David and Goliath struggle and was expected to provide answers to some of the major questions preventing settlement of red zone claims.
In this ...