Nayoung Kwon

A commercial general liability insurer had a duty to defend a semiconductor manufacturer against an employee's suit claiming that his exposure to chemicals at work caused birth defects in his son, the Ninth Circuit ruled Friday, finding that certain policy exclusions did not unambiguously foreclose coverage. In an unpublished opinion, a three-judge panel reversed Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s summary judgment win and remanded the case with orders to grant summary judgment for Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp., which defended TriQuint Semiconductor Inc. in the underlying suit. The panel also remanded for additional proceedings on Liberty's claim for damages related to Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s failure to defend. The coverage dispute stems from a $270 million suit lodged against TriQuint by employee Pedro Domion; his wife, Ashley Domion; and their child, Nicholas Domion, in July 2016. The underlying suit alleged that while working for TriQuint, Pedro Domion came into contact with numerous chemical products and substances such as cyanide, mercury, and arsenic compounds and radio frequency radiation. As a result of his exposure, the family said, Nicholas Domion was born in July 2009 with significant injuries, including chromosomal deletion, heart defects, and mental and cognitive impairment, among other things. Liberty, which insured TriQuint under a workers' compensation and employer's liability policy, agreed to provide the company with a defense, while Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s predecessor, OneBeacon America Insurance Co., denied TriQuint's request for coverage, according to court filings. The underlying suit was ultimately settled and dismissed with prejudice in April 2021. Liberty sued Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. in December 2022, seeking a declaration that Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. had an obligation to defend TriQuint in the underlying action. Liberty, which said it paid more than $2.4 million in legal fees and other costs to defend TriQuint, said it was owed $1.6 million plus interest from the commercial general liability insurer. Ruling on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, U.S. District Judge Adrienne Nelson held in November 2024 that an employer's liability exclusion in Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s policy barred coverage for some of the underlying claims and a pollution exclusion fully relieved the insurer of its duty to defend. The Ninth Circuit on Friday concluded that none of the three exclusions cited by Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. applied to the underlying suit. Although the employer's liability exclusion in Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s policy bars coverage for bodily injuries to an employee's child that are "a consequence of" an injury to that employee, the panel noted that the underlying suit does not specify any mechanism of Nicholas Domion's injuries. "Rather, it leaves open the possibility that the employee's minor child was injured without injury to the employee himself," the panel said. "Indeed, the underlying complaint alleges that TriQuint's ventilation, 'industrial hygiene policies,' and 'personal protective equipment' were inadequate, suggesting that the employee may have brought the chemical products and substances home without sustaining injury himself." Additionally, the underlying suit does not allege bodily injury arising out of the discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release, or escape of pollutants, the panel said. Instead, the suit alleged that Pedro Domion was "exposed" to chemical products and substances at TriQuint's facility. Applying the pollution exclusion to such exposures that occurred in the vicinity of intended use would "strain the plain meaning" of the exclusion, the panel held. An endorsement barring coverage for bodily injury arising out of exposure to electromagnetic radiation also does not apply since the underlying suit alleged that chemical products and substances caused Nicholas Domion's birth defects, the panel said. Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. Judges Morgan Christen, Andrew D. Hurwitz, and Roopali H. Desai sat on the panel for the Ninth Circuit. Liberty is represented by Chester D. Hill and Paul A. C. Berg of Cosgrave Vergeer Kester LLP. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. is represented by Sara L. Menton and Christian P. Jones of Intact US Coverage Litigation Group and Adam E. Jones of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. The case is Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. v. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. et al., case number 24-7353, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Feb 20

3 min

A commercial general liability insurer had a duty to defend a semiconductor manufacturer against an employee's suit claiming that his exposure to chemicals at work caused birth defects in his son, the Ninth Circuit ruled Friday, finding that certain policy exclusions did not unambiguously foreclose coverage. In an unpublished opinion, a three-judge panel reversed Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s summary judgment win and remanded the case with orders to grant summary judgment for Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp., which defended TriQuint Semiconductor Inc. in the underlying suit. The panel also remanded for additional proceedings on Liberty's claim for damages related to Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s failure to defend. The coverage dispute stems from a $270 million suit lodged against TriQuint by employee Pedro Domion; his wife, Ashley Domion; and their child, Nicholas Domion, in July 2016. The underlying suit alleged that while working for TriQuint, Pedro Domion came into contact with numerous chemical products and substances such as cyanide, mercury, and arsenic compounds and radio frequency radiation. As a result of his exposure, the family said, Nicholas Domion was born in July 2009 with significant injuries, including chromosomal deletion, heart defects, and mental and cognitive impairment, among other things. Liberty, which insured TriQuint under a workers' compensation and employer's liability policy, agreed to provide the company with a defense, while Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s predecessor, OneBeacon America Insurance Co., denied TriQuint's request for coverage, according to court filings. The underlying suit was ultimately settled and dismissed with prejudice in April 2021. Liberty sued Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. in December 2022, seeking a declaration that Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. had an obligation to defend TriQuint in the underlying action. Liberty, which said it paid more than $2.4 million in legal fees and other costs to defend TriQuint, said it was owed $1.6 million plus interest from the commercial general liability insurer. Ruling on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, U.S. District Judge Adrienne Nelson held in November 2024 that an employer's liability exclusion in Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s policy barred coverage for some of the underlying claims and a pollution exclusion fully relieved the insurer of its duty to defend. The Ninth Circuit on Friday concluded that none of the three exclusions cited by Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. applied to the underlying suit. Although the employer's liability exclusion in Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co.'s policy bars coverage for bodily injuries to an employee's child that are "a consequence of" an injury to that employee, the panel noted that the underlying suit does not specify any mechanism of Nicholas Domion's injuries. "Rather, it leaves open the possibility that the employee's minor child was injured without injury to the employee himself," the panel said. "Indeed, the underlying complaint alleges that TriQuint's ventilation, 'industrial hygiene policies,' and 'personal protective equipment' were inadequate, suggesting that the employee may have brought the chemical products and substances home without sustaining injury himself." Additionally, the underlying suit does not allege bodily injury arising out of the discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release, or escape of pollutants, the panel said. Instead, the suit alleged that Pedro Domion was "exposed" to chemical products and substances at TriQuint's facility. Applying the pollution exclusion to such exposures that occurred in the vicinity of intended use would "strain the plain meaning" of the exclusion, the panel held. An endorsement barring coverage for bodily injury arising out of exposure to electromagnetic radiation also does not apply since the underlying suit alleged that chemical products and substances caused Nicholas Domion's birth defects, the panel said. Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. Judges Morgan Christen, Andrew D. Hurwitz, and Roopali H. Desai sat on the panel for the Ninth Circuit. Liberty is represented by Chester D. Hill and Paul A. C. Berg of Cosgrave Vergeer Kester LLP. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. is represented by Sara L. Menton and Christian P. Jones of Intact US Coverage Litigation Group and Adam E. Jones of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. The case is Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp. v. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. et al., case number 24-7353, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Feb 20

3 min

Global law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer advised Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (‘CPP Investments’) on its long-term investment partnership with Power2X. The partnership plans to invest an initial EUR 130 million to accelerate the growth of Power2X as a development platform and fund green molecule projects. Under the terms of the deal, CPP Investments will acquire a majority interest in Power2X. Headquartered in Amsterdam, Power2X develops large-scale new energy assets and infrastructure focusing on decarbonising industrial value chains. The investment supports Power2X’s mission to become a long-term developer, owner and operator of next-generation energy assets with a focus on green hydrogen and other clean molecules such as green methanol and ammonia. The Freshfields team advising CPP Investments was led by partner Saloua Ouchan, with support from Marius Weyers, Nayoung Kwon, Emelde Rubaij-Bouman, Nick Surgey, Tijn Mandema, Sebastiaan Bonapart, Jordi Wals (Corporate), Eelco van der Stok and Daan van Schaik (Tax), Paul van den Berg, Rosa Warning and Clara Mendez de Vigo (Antitrust and Regulatory), Brechje Nollen, Julia Van Heusden and Babette Koning (People & Reward), Bert Spijkervet (Notarial) and Jan-Jaap Koningsveld (IP).

Jul 14

1 min

Global law firm Freshfields has acted as lead adviser to Liberty Global Ltd (“LG”) on the entry into definitive agreements with Vodafone Group Plc to acquire Vodafone’s 50% shareholding in the Dutch telecommunication joint venture, VodafoneZiggo. Under the terms of the agreements, Vodafone will receive € 1 bn in cash and a 10% shareholding in Ziggo Group, a new Benelux company that will hold LG’s interests in VodafoneZiggo in the Netherlands and Telenet in Belgium and Luxembourg. The transaction will enable LG to fully unlock the value of its Benelux operating businesses for shareholders, supported by plans to list Ziggo Group in 2027 on Euronext in Amsterdam by spin off the 90% held by Liberty Global to its shareholders. The multijurisdictional cross-practice team was led by Partners Hanneke Rothbarth (Corporate/M&A, Amsterdam) and Deborah Janssens (Corporate/M&A, Brussels), Counsel Marius Weyers (Corporate/M&A, Amsterdam), Principal Associate Joachim De Vos (Corporate/M&A, Brussels), and Associates Anne Zwolsman (Corporate/M&A, Amsterdam) and Sarah Wauthion (Corporate/M&A, Brussels). Tax advice was provided by Partner Bob Van Kasteren and Senior Associate Daan Van Schaik (both Amsterdam). The wider Freshfields team included Partners Alvaro Pliego Selie (Amsterdam), Sacha Schubert (Brussels), Tone Oeyen (Brussels), Principal Associate Björn Sijtsma (Brussels) and Associates Henri Putman (Brussels) and Veerle Peters (Amsterdam) for antitrust and regulatory advice. Partners Brechje Nollen (Amsterdam) and Satya Staes Polet (Brussels), and Associate Lotte Somers (Amsterdam) advised on the employment aspects. For commercial advice, Partner David Brooks (London), Counsel Tom Dye (London) and Associate Hannah Family (London). And for other corporate advice Partner Rhys Evans (London), Associates Riet Devriendt (Brussels) and Emma O’Keeffe (London).

Feb 20

1 min

Lawyers expect to play a key role in helping Canada achieve its recently announced CA$500-billion Defense Industrial Strategy, designed to reduce reliance on the United States in the wake of threats to its sovereignty from President Donald Trump. Canada’s sweeping plan, announced by Prime Minister Mark Carney on Feb. 17, offers a roadmap for the country’s largest military buildup in decades, aiming to reach NATO’s 2% GDP defense target in 2026, and 5% by 2035. The Defense Industrial Strategy (DIS) marks Canada’s first-ever defense-industrial strategy, and like Europe's similar plan, suggests the country can no longer count on the U.S., economically or militarily. It calls for the creation of a new Defense Investment Agency (DIA) to coordinate the process and cut red tape, provide $180 billion for defense procurement and $290 billion in defense-related capital investment over the next 10 years. Lawyers say legal support will be needed to assist clients with government contracts and procurement, corporate and commercial transactions, and to help them navigate regulations and compliance, intellectual property issues, Indigenous law, and employment and labor laws. “Lawyers will be essential advisers to clients in these and other corporate and commercial matters," Norton Rose Fulbright Canada partners Jenna Anne de Jong and Edward Anido said. “They will support the structuring of joint ventures, strategic partnerships with Indigenous participants and foreign allies, and corporate restructurings to meet Canadian ownership thresholds necessary for procurement eligibility or to implement strategic alliances.” In procurement, for example, Canada will be reforming its industrial and technological benefits policy framework from an emphasis on key industrial capabilities to a narrower set of “sovereign capabilities,” designed to incentivize strategic investments, expand domestic R&D and encourage the development and protection of Canadian-owned IP, they said. The DIS, among other things, is aimed at building "national champions" in Canadian defense and promoting meaningful Indigenous participation in defense supply chains. The agency, headed by former Royal Bank of Canada executive Doug Guzman, is tasked with cutting red tape and following a “Build, Partner, Buy” procurement framework that will emphasize building in Canada, partnering with trusted allies through tech transfer deals and integrated supply chains, and buying abroad only as a last resort. The government has predicted the DIS will create 125,000 jobs, increase Canadian defense exports by 50%, boost the share of defense acquisitions awarded to Canadian firms to 70%, and grow Canadian defense industry revenues by 240%. Russel Drew and Alan Sarhan, Canadian partners with DLA Piper, said in an email that companies operating in the defense space often require significant support in the technically demanding areas of technology transfer and export controls. Canadian companies operating in defense are almost always touching U.S. or other foreign rules, they noted. “Managing the overlapping regimes requires specialized knowledge in the applicable geographies," they said. “Foreign investment review is intensifying as national security scrutiny increases, and sanctions compliance has become a continuous supply chain obligation, not a transactional exercise.” The rapidly evolving regulatory environment will be challenging, they added. “Canada is accelerating its defense ambitions and approach faster than certain parts of the regulatory infrastructure can currently absorb," they said. “Lawyers need to help clients structure compliantly around current constraints rather than wait for the system to catch up.” Kerri Lui, a partner at McCarthy Tétrault with expertise in energy and defense, said it will be important for lawyers in the sector to stay on top of new developments and to stay “creative and flexible” in giving strategic advice. “The rate of change in the current geopolitical environment requires countries around the world, including Canada, to continue fine-tuning their approach to defense procurement. And those changes can create uncertainty for industry participants and investors, particularly new entrants," she said. While the rate of change is greater than what we have seen historically,” she added, “helping clients navigate uncertainty is what we do best as lawyers.” Canada’s Defense Industrial Strategy reflects a global trend toward rearmament, industrial sovereignty, and long‑term defense industrial investment driven by geopolitical instability and supply-chain vulnerability.

Mar 1

3 min