• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Subrogation on employers' liability cover

D

Dolemite

Member
Hi, I'm hoping someone will help clear this up in my mind.
I am going through the solution for Q3 on the 2018-04 SP7 paper:

(ii) State with a reason whether subrogation is likely to be material for each class, giving an example if appropriate:
(c) Employers’ Liability
The solution says subrogation is unlikely to be material.

My attempt said that:
- Subrogation will be substantial under this liability class.
- The insurer will be responsible for defending the employer from any legal action taken against it.
- For example, employees may sue an employer for exposure to asbestos in the workplace and resulting health complications.
- The insurer will take on these liabilities and will be responsible for the defence.
- There are unlikely to be any recoveries under this class as there is no property to sell, just the transfer of liabilities.

I am struggling to understand why subrogation wouldn't apply to this class. The definition of subrogation is that "it is the substitution of one party for another as a creditor, with a transfer of rights and responsibilities".
Under an EL claim, is the insurer not liable for compensating the claimant (hence there is a transfer of rights and responsibilities)?

Thanks,
Dolemite.
 
I'm no legal expert, but this is my understanding. You need a culpable third party for subrogation. For example:

Motor: let's say you have a crash. You have motor insurance, so you claim on that. Your insurer pays you for the damage to be repaired, but now 'steps into your shoes' (that's the subrogation bit), and so takes over - they then find that the other driver was at fault, so they look to recover their loss from the other driver (or more likely their insurer).

Employers' liability: let's say you're the employee, and you've slipped over on some oil at work which was due to your employer's negligence. You claim against them for your recuperation. But your employer has EL cover (by law in the UK), so gets the cost back from their insurer. Now the insurer steps into the employer's shoes (that's the subrogation bit again) - and then...oh hold on, there's nobody else to get the money back from. So it's not going to work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top