Excess of loss insurance – Who decides how claims are allocated?
On 31 July 2013, the UK Supreme Court handed down judgment in Teal Assurance Company Limited v WR Berkley Insurance Limited and another  UKSC 57, a case which considers how a tower of insurance is exhausted by multiple claims against the insured due to the way in which those claims are allocated against the tower. This paper will examine the principles confirmed by the Teal decision and consider the likely implications for Australia.
Significant cases, legislation or articles referred to
- Teal Assurance Company Limited v WR Berkley Insurance Limited and another  UKSC 57
- s 6 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 (NSW)
- s 206 of the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002
- ss 26-28 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act
- s 9 of the Law Reform Act 1936 (NZ)
- Chubb Insurance Company of Australia Limited v Moore  NSWCA 212
- BFSL 2007 Limited & Ors (in liquidation) v Steigrad  NZSC 156