Click on your business type in the menu bar below to find specific insurance and funding information for you

Calling all in-house lawyers: ATE Insurance and funding can save the day

By David Pipkin FCILEX, NED Temple Legal Protection

(Estimated reading time: 3 minutes 49 seconds)

As a lawyer who worked in-house for Temple for over 15 years, I was asked to define what in-house lawyers do. I said they typically work within a specific company or organisation and provide legal advice and guidance to the company’s management and employees.  This article is based on my personal experience takes a look at their role and how ATE insurance and disbursement can help.

The role of in-house lawyers can vary depending on the industry, size and structure of the company. Some common responsibilities of in-house lawyers include drafting and reviewing contracts, managing legal disputes, and ensuring compliance with laws and regulations.

It is important for in-house lawyers to stay up-to-date on changes in relevant laws and regulations that may affect the company they work for. The reality is that those rules are diverse and cover a huge range of industries from insurance, banking and manufacturing to charities and local government.

My own role was to direct the Insurance Underwriting division and my legal qualification and experience was critical to this function. By the time I took up this role, ATE insurance had become embedded in the personal injury and clinical negligence claim process. Over the next decade or so, more and more commercial litigation lawyers realised the importance of ATE insurance and funding (especially disbursements) but very few in-house lawyers did so.

In-house lawyers who have a litigation role may need access to funding and ATE insurance for a variety of reasons. Here are some potential reasons:

  • Funding: In-house lawyers may need funding to cover the costs of litigation or other legal matters. Litigation can be expensive, and in-house lawyers may need to hire outside counsel, pay court fees, or cover other expenses related to the legal matter. Having access to funding can help ensure that the company can afford to pursue legal action when necessary.
  • After-the-Event (ATE) insurance: this can provide cover for legal costs and disbursements in the event that a legal action is unsuccessful. In-house lawyers may also need ATE insurance to mitigate the financial risk of pursuing legal action. If a case is unsuccessful, the company may be responsible for paying the other party’s legal fees as well as their own. ATE insurance can help protect the company from these costs.
  • Access to justice: Access to funding and ATE insurance can also help ensure that companies have that all important access to justice. Without access to funding or insurance, some companies may be unable to pursue legal action, even if they have a strong case. This could put them at a disadvantage and prevent them from protecting their legal rights.

In summary, in-house lawyers may need access to funding and ATE insurance to cover the costs of legal action and mitigate the financial risk of pursuing legal matters. This can help ensure that companies have access to justice and can protect their legal rights.

So why have in-house lawyers come late to the party?

Is it because  their organisation feels they will lose control of the litigation, or do they feel they appear weakened if they take up insurance cover – or is it the fear of the unknown? The reality is that ATE insurance can take the risk of losing off the organisation’s balance sheet.

Yes, there is a cost, but the premium is fixed and can be accurately budgeted.

At present, financial constraints are causing everyone great difficulties and I have read a number of recent articles urging in-house lawyers to be ever mindful of careful budgeting – whether litigating in-house or with external law firms.

One phrase I have seen a lot is the need to ‘make less go further’. I  think most organisations don’t have large pockets to fund litigation (except perhaps the energy companies). ATE insurance not only transfers the risk of litigation but the organisation gains an experienced litigation insurance partner.

Many ATE providers, including Temple, can also provide disbursement funding. Experts are expensive – as are court fees.

Pundits have been saying we can expect to see further rises in the frequency of litigation. With that in mind, do note that ATE insurance and funding can cover the defence of litigation.

You may not have any current litigation at present but now is the time to explore how ATE insurance can assist in-house lawyers to deliver an efficient litigation service on budget. Contact Temple today to see how an ATE insurance facility can be set up tailored for your organisation’s needs; or, if you do already have litigation in process, you can explore how ATE can assist and drive the litigation to a better resolution. For either situation please either email  or call him on 01483 514428.

David Pipkin

Non-Executive Director
Read articles by David Pipkin

David Pipkin

David was Director of Temple’s Underwriting Division for 14 years during which time he supported Temple’s coverholders with his exceptional knowledge, expert guidance and friendly countenance.

He is now a Non-Executive member of the board supporting the strategic direction of the company and attending key events and meetings with our customers.

David has spent over 40 years as a Legal Executive specialising in personal injury litigation. Initially, he was a claimant litigator pursuing leading industrial accident and disease cases.

As an Associate at Davies Arnold Cooper for over a decade he managed a team of lawyers and acted for defendants in personal injury and general insurance litigation. In this role, he became involved in the early development of the ATE market, assisting the ABI in their involvement in the Court of Appeal test cases such as Callery v Gray.

As the London representative for FOIL he was involved in the liability insurers’ approach to ATE and worked with the government and judiciary in several key consultations. He was a member of the CILEX National Council for over 15 years and was CILEX President in 1995/6.


Read articles by David Pipkin