Insurance Dispute Resolution Lawyers

Our Insurance & Reinsurance Dispute Resolution team is a recognised industry leader, having been involved in numerous high-profile disputes. From the latest claims and notification arising from the sub-prime crisis, to the most complicated major catastrophes, as well as perennial market challenges, our team has market-leading experience representing insurers and reinsurers in complex, high-value arbitration, litigation and mediation matters.

Insurance disputes can arise out of insured risks, claims or policy disputes, but insurers are also facing unprecedented regulatory challenges. Our team of dedicated experts combine significant experience with the legal and commercial acumen necessary to obtain a desirable and cost-effective resolution in this dynamic, challenging and highly competitive field.

Our global presence enables us to provide comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional legal advice at the times most critical to our clients.

Our team are experienced in all types of disputes, including:

  • Coverage and allocation
  • Finite risk reinsurance
  • Problems relating to managing general agencies and pools
  • Insurance/reinsurance insolvency litigation
  • Binding authority issues
  • Wording issues and advice

We represent a wide range of clients, including many of the world’s leading reinsurers, insurers and brokers on issues concerning:

  • Facultative
  • Excess
  • Coverage issues
  • Captive disputes
  • Conflicts of laws and forum shopping
  • Special risks
  • Financial lines
  • Directors’ and officers’ liability
  • Errors and omissions (particularly accountants’)
  • Environmental coverage
  • Policy and contract review

Client Experience

Representative Work

Insurance Arbitration

Representing a reinsurer in arbitration against a Bermuda insured where our client was seeking to have the insurance declared void by reason of material non-disclosure

Representing insurers of the Hyatt Regency Grand Cayman

Representing insurers of the Hyatt Regency Grand Cayman in relation to a US$70 million contested insurance claim, which has given rise to multiple proceedings involving three layers of excess insurers in multiple jurisdictions.

More news
Website-Code-BVI-1
26 Aug 2026

BVI Court Prevents BVI Company from Redomiciling to Preserve Enforcement Against its Shares

In our article published on 14 November 2025 we addressed an interesting case in which the Court appointed a liquidator to a foreign dissolved company, titled “BVI Court Appoints Liquidators to Foreign Dissolved Company”.  That article referenced a further, related, 2-day hearing that was heard and ultimately determined earlier in the year (on 6 May 2025) in which the Claimants sought to prevent a BVI company from re-domiciling itself to Palestine (the Re-domiciliation Application). This article summarises the key aspects of those Applications.

Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
13 Aug 2026

Restructurings Frustrating Creditors And The Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards: The English High Court's Decision In State Oil Company Of Azerbaijan v Mansimov

The English High Court has issued a significant judgment on the enforcement of arbitral awards, the reach of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the limits of the Marex tort, with potential relevance to the Cayman Islands' Fraudulent Dispositions Act.

Website-Code-BVI-2
6 Aug 2026

The Rights of Sanctioned Litigants to access to the Court: Court of Appeal issues Key Decision in the BVI

The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has delivered a significant judgment in AO Alfa-Bank v Kipford Ventures Limited, overturning a stay of proceedings and reinstating a US$142 million freezing injunction. The decision provides important guidance on access to justice, sanctions, and interim relief in the BVI.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
5 Aug 2026

Good faith in action, not just belief: the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa and its significance in the Cayman Islands

May a company director depart from a strategy his board has agreed, in the sincere belief that he knows a better route to the company’s success? In Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court held that, whatever the answer, a director cannot pursue his own strategy by concealing it from, and misleading, his fellow directors. The Court confirmed that the good faith duty is not confined to a director’s sincerely held view of the company’s best interests; it also governs the means by which the director acts. The decision is an authoritative statement of the content of the fiduciary duty of loyalty, and is likely to be influential in the Cayman Islands. The decision will interest directors, those who advise or appoint them, and stakeholders affected by directors’ conduct.

Website-Code-Cayman-2
30 Jul 2026

Contingent Creditors, Standing And The Winding Up Jurisdiction: Analysing Re Petrosaudi International

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has delivered a highly significant judgment in Re PetroSaudi International.[1] The Court clarified the circumstances in which an alleged contingent creditor will have standing to petition to wind up a company under section 94(1)(b) of the Companies Act, and confirmed that there is no jurisdiction to make a winding up order on an ex parte without notice basis.[2] Our article analyses the Court of Appeal’s decision, and considers its implications for insolvency practitioners.

Website-Code-Cayman-1
30 Jul 2026

Final Means Final: Wei v Wang and the Common Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Cayman Islands

English Court Reaffirms Pro-Enforcement Approach to Foreign Judgments In Wei v Wang [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm), the Court confirmed that exceptional avenues of review do not undermine the finality of a judgment and reiterated the limited scope of the natural justice defence.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
28 Jul 2026

Drelle Overturned in Latest UK Supreme Court Decision

The United Kingdom Supreme Court in its recent decision in Drelle v Servis-Terminal LLC [2026] UKSC 29 (Drelle SC) has overturned the controversial decision of the English Court of Appeal in Servis-Terminal LLC v Drelle [2025] EWCA Civ 62 (Drelle CA), and in doing so has provided welcome clarity on the effect of unrecognised foreign judgments in cross-border bankruptcy and insolvency contexts. This is likely to have a wide-reaching impact – not only in the UK but also offshore – and particularly in the British Virgin Islands following the recent decision in JJW Hotels & Resorts Holding Inc v Rhodes (BVIHCM2025/0296) (JJW Hotels) (which relied heavily on Drelle CA), and in the Cayman Islands where previous authorities had recognised the ability, in the corporate context, for petitioners to present winding up petitions on the basis of an unrecognised foreign judgment.