Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Too Much <i>Fluor?</i> California Supreme Court Overturns <i>Henkel</i>
Consent-to-assignment clauses are integral features of most commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies because they eliminate the potential burden of unknown parties seeking insurance coverage for liability that an insurer did not foresee or intend to cover. Pursuant to these clauses, an insured cannot assign its interest in insurance benefits to another party without the insurer's consent. Given their salutary purposes, California courts have historically upheld the validity of these consent-to-assignment clauses in CGL policies, even in situations where the event giving rise to liability occurred prior to the putative assignment. However, the California Supreme Court recently reversed course and overturned one of its earlier decisions, rejecting consent-to-assignment clauses as a bar to coverage where the loss at issue pre-dates the assignment.
This article: 1) provides an overview of consent-to-assignment clauses in CGL policies; 2) discusses the California Supreme Court's decision in Henkel; and 3) examines the California Supreme Court decision in Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court and its impact on the enforceability of consent-to-assignment clauses.
Background
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?