The Lottie Sleigh is a famous case in insurance law. Around 80 of the properties damaged by the explosion were insured with the same company, which paid out an average of £12-13 to each claimant. The company directors were sued by some of the shareholders for paying out unnecessary claims as the policies contained the statement "that the company should not be responsible for any loss or damage by explosion, except such as might arise from explosion by gas". The directors argued that the cause of the damage was the original fire and not the explosion. The court agreed with this, despite the general insurance principle of Causa Proxima Non Remota Spectatur ("the proximate and not the remote cause must be looked into") which would hold that the fire was a remote cause and the proximate, or immediate cause, of the damage was the explosion. The case also led to a definition of the term "by gas" in the policy. The vice-chancellor of England decided that it should not be broadly construed as all explosions were caused by ignition of gas and that "gas" in this context meant only "coal gas", which was then supplied to domestic premises for heating and lighting purposes.
