Empyrean Protocol

Empyrean Intelligence Console

← Back to briefs

Watford Community Housing Trust v Arthur J Gallagher Insurance Brokers Ltd [2025] EWHC 743 (Comm) (08 April 2025)

Source: Open mirrored case · Original bailii.org

Sanctions — Geo ✓

Executive Summary

This case concerns a professional negligence claim by Watford Community Housing Trust against Arthur J Gallagher Insurance Brokers Ltd for failing to timely notify two insurers (QBE and Hiscox) of a 2020 data breach. The Defendant broker admits negligence but argues no loss was caused due to double insurance provisions limiting total indemnity. The Claimant was insured under three policies: Cyber Policy (£1M limit), Combined Policy (£5M limit), and PI Policy (£5M limit). QBE initially declined cover but later indemnified the Claimant; Hiscox maintained its declinature. The key legal issue is whether the “other insurance” clauses reduce the Claimant’s recoverable indemnity below the total losses incurred.

Sanctions Highlights

— No sanctions implications identified in this litigation.

Emerging Risks

  • Potential for uncovered liability exceeding £6 million due to exhausted Cyber and eroded QBE cover.
  • Risk of further claims until limitation period expires in March 2026.
  • Uncertainty over interpretation of “other insurance” clauses may affect future claims involving multiple overlapping policies.
  • Possible precedent for limiting indemnity recoveries in cases of multiple insurance policies with conflicting excess and non-contribution clauses.

Geopolitical Impact

  • The case involves insurers and brokers operating under UK law, with implications for insurance markets in the UK, Canada, and the United States where similar multi-policy arrangements and data breach exposures are common.
  • The judgment may influence cross-border insurance litigation strategies and broker liability standards in these jurisdictions.

Economic Intelligence

  • The Claimant’s potential uncovered losses could exceed £6 million, impacting financial stability of insured entities facing large-scale data breaches.
  • Insurers’ interpretation of “other insurance” clauses may limit aggregate payouts, affecting claims reserves and underwriting practices.
  • Brokers’ negligence in notification processes could increase professional liability claims and insurance costs.
  • The case highlights the economic significance of clear policy drafting and timely claims management in cyber and professional indemnity insurance sectors.

Strategic Recommendations

  • Insured entities should review all overlapping insurance policies for “other insurance” clauses and notification requirements to avoid coverage gaps.
  • Brokers must implement rigorous compliance and notification protocols to mitigate negligence risks.
  • Insurers should clarify policy language on excess and non-contribution to reduce litigation risk.
  • Legal teams should monitor this case for precedent on double insurance interpretation affecting indemnity limits.
  • Risk managers should prepare for potential uncovered losses beyond policy limits in complex multi-policy claims.

---

Source Notes: *Sanctions Intelligence Digest* — https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation/view/www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/743.txt

Brief metadata