The Gazette 1944-46

financial loss. Throughout the transactions the client had acted in a most unbusinesslike fashion and to a large extent against the advice of his solicitor. In 1939 he made a claim against the firm for damages for negligence arising out of the transactions of the preceding three years. The solicitors passed on the claim to the underwriters, who advanced various contentions for avoiding liability. Finally the underwriters repudiated liability under the policy but not the policy itself. The insured on the advice of counsel settled the action against them for £2,750, and then commenced an action against the underwriters claiming indem nity under the policy. The defence of the under writers to the claim was in the form of a dilemma. Either the insured had been negligent in 1935 or they had not. If they had been negligent there were facts within their knowledge when the policy came up for renewal in 1939 which were unknown to the underwriters and which were material to be known by them before they accepted the proposal for renewal. If the insured had not been negligent they should not have settled the action against them. Atkinson, J., in delivering judgment stated that in his opinion there was nothing in the transactions of 1935 which Kenward as a reasonable solicitor ought to have disclosed when the policy was renewed in 1939. He based his decision, however, on the act that for some months after they had been notified of the existence of the claim in 1939, and then knowing everything, the underwriters had allowed the insured to think that the policy was good, and that the insured had in fact changed their position as the result thereof. Judgment was given for the insured. The nature of a solicitor's business is such that if he is so unfortunate as to place himself in a position where he is liable to a client for negligence, he is unlikely to be aware of the fact before a claim is made against him, perhaps after the lapse of years. If the policy is not in force at the time when the claim is made the solicitor will not necessarily be covered, notwithstanding that he was insured at the time of the alleged negligence which is the subject of the claim. If, however, during the currency of the policy the solicitor becomes aware of the possibility or probability of a claim against him and notifies the insurers thereof before renewal, any claim made afterwards will be deemed to have been made during the currency of the policy even if it is not renewed. In any event, failure to disclose in any proposal for renewal any matter within the knowledge of the proposer which would cause a reasonable solicitor to anticipate the making of a claim against him may afford a defence to the under writers to a claim for indemnity under the policy.

of the assignments, setting out particulars thereof. In this connection, solicitors should have regard to Section 14 of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1860. Solicitors for Purchasers should request the Vendors' solicitors to see that the giving of the necessary notice of assignment is not overlooked. Solicitors for vendors are also reminded that on completing sales of property they should inform the Rate Collector of the sale and the name and address of the new owner of the property.

LLOYD'S SOLICITORS' INDEMNITY POLICY

IN the Solicitors' Journal of i9th May last there is an interesting report of an action against Lloyd's underwriters by solicitors claiming indemnity against liability for negligence on foot of the usual policy issued by Lloyd's. The case is entitled Simon, Haynes, Barlas & Ireland v. Beer, but does not appear to have been officially reported. As solicitors are aware the standard Lloyd's policy of insurance against liability for negligence by solicitors is an indemnity to the insured party against loss arising from any claim made against the insured during the period of twelve calendar months during which the policy subsists after issue and each renewal. It is a condition precedent to the right to indemnity under the policy that the insured should give immediate written notice to the underwriters of any claim made him in respect of which he claims indemnity. The policy contains a further clause providing that if (a) the insured shall receive written notice from any third party of intention to hold him responsible for the results of any alleged neglect, etc., or (£) if the insured shall become aware of any occurrence which may subsequently give rise to a claim against him, and shall in either case give written notice thereof to the underwriter during the currency of the policy, then any claim subsequently made against him on foot thereof shall be deemed to be a claim made during the currency of the policy. On each annual proposal for renewal of the policy the insured is required to declare that he has no reason to anticipate the making of any claim against him for professional negligence. The plaintiffs in the above action were insured under a policy which was renewed for the period 3rd October, 1938, to 3rd October, 1939. During the year 1935 the junior partner Mr. Kenward had advised a Mr. Cook in connection with advances which the latter made on the security of debentures to a limited company, and as the result of which he afterwards sustained