“He’s very sharp and very good on coverage matters.” “Neil is highly intelligent and analytical with an eye for detail. He is an excellent advocate, extremely knowledgeable and a pleasure to work with.” “He’s exceptionally good and is very commercial.” –Chambers & Partners, 2021
“Neil has a finely tuned intellect, is logical and calm, and his judgement is excellent. He is also very down to earth and engaging, and his manner inspires confidence and respect in equal measure.” – Legal 500, 2021
“A very impressive and compelling advocate. Voraciously intelligent but nevertheless able to explain complex points clearly.” “Clear thinking and decisive with a good grasp of strategy and commercial outcomes.” – Chambers & Partners, 2020
“Straightforward, highly analytical and impressive on his feet.” – Legal 500, 2020
“Fantastically detailed and very diligent.” “He has a great eye for detail and is able to drill down to the heart of the most complex of cases. Highly intelligent and analytical.” – Chambers & Partners, 2019
Neil acts for both insurers and insureds dealing with the entire range of coverage issues. He has experience that is both broad and in depth, encompassing issues of non-disclosure and misrepresentation, breach of warranty, application of conditions precedent, as well as aggregation, the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Acts, subrogation and notification of circumstances in claims made policies. His experience includes public liability policies, material damage/business interruption, directors & officers insurance, construction/erection all risks, employers’ liability, jewellers block policies and professional indemnity. He regularly advises both insurers and insureds on policy response, including on questions of fraud, and has also advised insurers on drafting of policy terms.
Neil has a particular interest in construction related insurance and advises on design and build cover and contractors all risks policies. He has expertise in the effect of the joint insurance provisions in the standard construction forms and significant experience in the issues that frequently arise as to the width of cover for construction defects following a notification.
He has acted in a number of cases involving claims on financial advisers’ liability policies arising out of FCA mandated remediation schemes, dealing with coverage issues, and in particular the threshold for notification of circumstances.
He has particular experience in relation to the arguments that commonly arise in relation to the solicitors’ minimum terms, including the meaning and effect of the aggregation clause, and its application to bulk retail practices. He also advises on public/employer’s liability cover for historical abuse claims.
Neil regularly acts in insurance broking cases and has appeared in a number of the recent important cases in this area.
He is recognised in Chambers & Partners as a leading Silk in Insurance, “a silk known for the quality of his advice”, “gets to the nub of things very quickly”, “he delivers robust, comprehensive and well-formulated commercial advice and products exceptional advocacy” (Chambers & Partners, 2018); “technically excellent and a real fighter”, “Incredibly bright and hard working, and particularly good on highly technical insurance issues” , “he’s an absolutely brilliant teamworker and someone who looks at the detail and picks up points other people would miss“ (Chambers & Partners, 2017); “ferociously bright, with an excellent eye for detail” (Chambers & Partners, 2016).
His important cases in this field include:
- Dalamd Ltd v. Butterworth Spengler Commercial Ltd  Lloyd’s Rep IR 295 (claim against insurance broker arising out of fire at waste recycling facility; effect of non-disclosure on variation of composite policy; test for causation in broker’s claims; whether balance of probabilities or loss of a chance)
- Pakeezah Meat Supplies Ltd v. Total Insurance Solutions Ltd  Lloyd’s Rep IR 137 (assessment of damages in brokers claim)
- Channon v. Ward  EWCA Civ 13 (Court of Appeal; representing broker in £1.8m claim arising out of failure to place accountants’ PI cover; whether notional policy would have paid out)
- A £30m claim against insurers arising out of dispute between design and build contractor and employer for alleged defects in the design of a waste processing plant; alleged failure of process to pass reliability testing; whether contractually waste was “acceptable waste”; cause of catastrophic failure of one of main structural members in composting hall (2015)
- Ocean Finance & Mortgages Ltd v. Oval Insurance Broking Ltd (2015) (acting for brokers in the context of an £4m claim arising out of alleged failure to make a block notification in respect of sale of PPI products)
- Acting for the Claimants in an arbitration brought under the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 concerning the aggregation provisions of the solicitors’ minimum terms (2015)
- Homeserve plc v. RSA (2014) (claim against insurers by financial services provider for costs of remediation exercise mandated by FCA)
- Jones v. Environcom Ltd  Lloyd’s Rep IR 676 (claim against brokers arising out of fire at waste processing facility; scope of broker’s duty to explain duty of utmost good faith; whether insured insurable);  Lloyd’s Rep IR 190 (whether insurers seeking negative declaration in relation to cover can obtain security for costs against counterclaiming insured)
- Dedames v. NFU Mutual  EWHC 2805 (non-disclosure and affirmation)
- Mopani Copper Mines plc v. Millennium Underwriting Ltd  Lloyd’s Rep IR 158 (significance of deletions to construction of reinsurance slip)