(Supreme Court of California) – In a case concerning an insured’s assignment of the right to invoke defense and indemnification coverage under a liability policy issued by real party in interest insurer, the Court of Appeals’ decision in favor of insurer is reversed where: 1) in light of the relevant language and history of section 520, the statute applies to third party liability insurance, and it also bars an insurer from refusing to honor an insured’s assignment of policy coverage regarding injuries that predate the assignment; and 2) the decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934, which assessed the proper application of a consent-to-assignment clause under common law principles, cannot stand in view of the contrary dictates of the controlling statutory provisions of section 520.