New Judgment: AIG Europe Ltd v Woodman & Ors  UKSC 18
22 Wednesday Mar 2017
On appeal from:  EWCA Civ 367
This appeal considered what the true construction of the words ‘in a series of related matters or transactions’ is within the aggregation clause of a professional indemnity insurance policy. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal, stating that ‘in a series of related transactions’ must mean that the transactions are interconnected, but that there was no need for the Law Society to further qualify this with a word such as ‘intrinsic’ which the Court of Appeal had interpreted as being present. The Supreme Court thought the lack of further criteria was unsurprising as the test is already sensitive, and must be judged objectively with the starting point to identify the relevant matter or transactions. In this case, as the transactions related to different development sites, had different investors, and were protected by different trust over different assets, the Court held that the transactions did not meet the test and so should not be aggregated together.