Following on from the professional indemnity thread, I mentioned that I believed that even where run-off cover had expired that practitioners ran the risk of a negligence claim.
This is because of the date of knowledge defence to the statute of limitations.
Another poster thought this did not apply to negligence. I have a counsels opinion which indirectly states that it does ( the opinion relates mainly to a different issue but refers to the area of negligence, and the amendment to the statute of limitations relating to date of knowledge).
I wondered if other posters had an opinion. If it is the case that date of knowledge is a defence to the statute then it becomes more important that we try to have the relevant insurance cover operating not from the date of the claim but the insurance that was in existance when the negligence occurred.