We recently wrote about the California Supreme Court’s decision in Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court to limit the enforceability of clauses in third party liability insurance policies that prohibit the policyholder from assigning its interests in the policy without the insurer’s prior consent. The court held that these so-called anti-assignment clauses are not enforceable after a third party has suffered personal injury or property damage covered under the policy and for which the insured may be liable. A New Jersey appellate court has reached the same conclusion in Givaudan Fragrances Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. There, Givaudan Fragrances Corporation sought coverage under a corporate affiliate’s insurance policies for numerous claims brought against Givaudan for environmental contamination. The appellate court concluded that the policies’ anti-assignment clause was no longer enforceable as to the losses that had occurred before the assignment.
Latest Post
More Posts
Seventh Circuit Issues Stern Warning For Insurers That Reject Their Duty to Defend
California Supreme Court Limits Enforceability of Anti-Assignment Clauses
Georgia Supreme Court Complicates Policyholders’ Ability to Settle Claims Brought Against Them
Texas Says EPA Administrative Actions under CERCLA Trigger Duty to Defend
Third Circuit Finds Insured v. Insured Exclusion Precludes Recovery of Defense Costs
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Holds That Insured May Settle Tort Claim Without Insurer Consent Under “Fair and Reasonable” Standard
Montana Joins Majority of Courts Holding That Insurers Must Establish Prejudice to Disclaim Coverage Based on an Insured’s Late Notice
Policyholder Warning: What One Provision Giveth (Defense Costs), Another Provision May Taketh Away
Louisiana Supreme Court Holds That Statute May Confer Broad Duties On Insurers
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS
Blogs
Firm/Org