In re Asbestos Insurance Coverage Cases

1 W.L.R. 331 (1985)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Asbestos Insurance Coverage Cases

House of Lords
1 W.L.R. 331 (1985)

  • Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD

Facts

Four American companies that manufactured asbestos (collectively, manufacturers) (plaintiffs) sued Sedgwick Group Plc and two of its subsidiaries (collectively, Sedgwick) and three directors of insurance-brokerage firms (directors) (collectively, defendants) in the California Superior Court, alleging that Sedgwick failed to defend or indemnify the manufacturers in lawsuits that asserted asbestos-related injuries. The manufacturers claimed that Price, Forbes & Co. Ltd. (Price, Forbes) and Sedgwick were responsible for drafting and marketing the insurance policies to the United States. On application of the manufacturers, the superior court issued letters rogatory to Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice in England, requesting assistance in obtaining depositions and the production of documents in England. England’s Evidence Act of 1975 (1975 act) allowed the high court to issue orders for deposition and the production of documents. Section 4 of the 1975 act stated that a party could not be required to produce documents other than the “particular documents specified in the order.” The high court ordered the directors to appear for deposition in England and ordered Sedgwick to produce (1) written instructions from the manufacturers or their agents to Sedgwick about certain insurance policies and (2) exemplars of Price, Forbes’s umbrella insurance policies used in London from 1950 to 1966. On appeal, Sedgwick argued that the high court’s order did not specify the “particular documents” it was required to produce. The directors argued that they had only limited relevant information. The court of appeal dismissed the directors’ appeal but allowed, in part, Sedgwick’s appeal. Sedgwick and the directors appealed to the House of Lords.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fraser, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 798,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership