Under the subrogation clause, legal action can be taken by the insurer against which entity?

The subrogation clause in insurance allows the insurer to step into the shoes of the insured after a claim has been paid, enabling the insurer to pursue recovery from any party that is deemed responsible for the loss. This is particularly relevant in health and accident insurance, where an insured may have incurred medical expenses due to the actions of a third party.

When a claim is made, and the insurer pays out to the insured, the insurer has the right to seek reimbursement from a responsible third party, such as another individual or entity that caused the injury or damage. By doing so, the insurer aims to mitigate its own losses and ensure that the party at fault is held accountable for their actions. This helps maintain the principle of indemnity, which prevents the insured from profiting from the claim and reinforces the responsibility of the liable party.

In contrast, taking legal action against the insured, the employer, or the state does not align with the subrogation principle. The insured has already received compensation, and it would not be appropriate for the insurer to pursue them or the employer (typically who may provide workers' compensation in cases of workplace accidents) to recover what they have already paid out. Legal action against the state is also generally limited and governed by sovereign immunity