SIXTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM
OCTOBER 2, 2014
BUSINESS MATTERS
HARVARD CLUB
BACK BAY
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS
Disclaimer
Today’s symposium presentations are for educational
purposes only. The views expressed by the panelists
are their own, and are stated in the context of this
educational program. The views expressed do not
represent the views of their respective companies,
customers, law firms, or clients.
The New Reinsurance Dispute
Landscape
ROBERT W. HAMMESFAHR
HWR CONSULTING LLC
Reinsurance Works
 Capital: Balance Sheet and Earning Protection
 Risk Transfer
 Knowledge Support re Underwriting,
Pricing/Reserving, Claims
 Arbitrage



Regulatory
Tax, Currency, Interest Rates
Risk Valuation
Key Reinsurance Industry Facts
 Insurance Premiums: $4.6 trillion
 56.8% life/43.2% non-life
 82.7% Developed and 17.3% Emerging
 Source: III August 2014
 US Insurance Jobs: 2.4 million
 Reinsurance: 27,200
 Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2014 as reported in
Best’s Review
Key Reinsurance Facts Continued
 Global Reinsurance Revenue: $591 bn (2013)
 Projected R/I Revenue: $873 bn (2018)
 Growth: 6.3% to 8% (Excess of GNP Growth?)
 Employment Worldwide: 344,000
 Number of Reinsurance businesses: 10,920
 Products: 1. Life, 2. Accident, Health & Medical, 3.
Property and Casualty, Surety & Title, Investment
Assets
Key Reinsurance Facts Continued
Key Reinsurers:
Big four: Berkshire, Munich Re, Swiss Re,
Hannover Re
Other Large European: Lloyd’s, SCOR, Partner
Re, Ace, XL
Asian: China Re, Korean Re, Tao Re, Japanese
Bermuda Reinsurers
US Reinsurers: RGA
Key Reinsurance Facts Continued
 Total Reinsurance Capital: $540bn ($316bn or 58%




is property cat)
Growth of Alternative Capital: $50bn or 14% of
$540bn and $40bn or 19% of $316bn)
“Alternative capital is transforming market and
pushing down prices” III August 2014
If 2% of $7 trillion of private pension funds invests in
AC, AC will be increase to $140 bn
ROI of AC: 5% - 8% versus traditional 8% - 10% and
distress returns of 12%-20%
Nat Cat Losses: 16 US - $231 and 5 Non-US $84.5 All number Billions
Industry, Liability and Service Trends
Industry Trends:
Offshoring of Reinsurance
Hedge Fund Reinsurance: The Float
Alternative Capital: Bond Rate Return Model
Liability Trends
Impact of Economic Crisis and ACA
New Risks
Rise of Mediation and ADR
Delivery of Services
Internet Impact: Transparency, Speed, Decision Maker
Model
Deconstruction of Reinsurance
Data analysis/software tools and new loss models
Reinsurance Law
 Contract Law
Reasonable Expectations v. Strict Construction
Source of Decisions, Treaties, Industry
Publications, Mock Decisions, Market Practice
Follow the Fortunes
ARIAS versus UK Arbitrations/Litigation
Role of Custom and Practice
Lessons Learned
 Legal Assumptions
 Civil versus Anglo Saxon law
Independence/Strength of Judiciary and Bar
 Common law v. Code
 Advocacy v. Inquisition legal system
 Discovery
 Cultural issues: compensation, negotiation and other expectations



Languages
Role of academics, economists and business
Lesson Learned continued
 WTC
 Subprime Economic Losses
 California Wildfires
 KRW
 Asian Nat Cats
 Deepwater
 Pollution/Asbestos/Health Hazard (APH)
Reinsurance Dispute Drivers
 Objections to Underlying Settlements
 Recovery after Settlement – UK v. US
 Settlement to avoid criminal fines
 Misrepresentation and Fraud
 Disclosure Requirements – UK v. US
 Discovery
 Improper Accumulations
 NatCat versus asbestos
Five Claim Predictions
Attacks on Neutrality of Arbitration Panels
Use of Reinsurance Custom and Practice
Focus on Venue and Law Selection
Reliance on ADR
Rise of New Emerging Risks and Markets
Conclusion
 New dispute patterns are emerging
 Legal strategies and tactics really impact loss size
and timing
 Reinsurance claims professionalism is key to
industry
 Reinsurers needs to embrace new risks and client
needs
SIXTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM
OCTOBER 2, 2014
BUSINESS MATTERS
HARVARD CLUB
BACK BAY
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
PANELISTS:
ALEXANDER G. HENLIN
EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP
KRISTIN SUGA HERES
ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL & MASON LLP
JOHN H. PHILLIPS
GENERAL REINSURANCE COMPANY
STEPHEN ZERA
AIG PROPERTY CASUALTY
Disclaimer
Today’s symposium presentation is for educational
purposes only. The views expressed by the panelists
are their own, and are stated in the context of this
educational program. The views expressed do not
represent the views of their respective companies,
customers, law firms, or clients.
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE
IN THE AGE OF ECONOMIC SANCTIONS
Economic and Trade Sanctions
 Economic and trade sanctions have long been used to
advance foreign policy goals.
 The U.S. and other countries/EU are increasingly using
sanctions to manage threats to their security, foreign policy,
and economies.
 Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
BNP Paribas: A Cautionary Tale
 BNP faced criminal charges for decade-long
conspiracy to evade U.S. trade sanctions
 Agreed to pay a record $8.9 BILLION penalty
 Takeaway: There are real consequences for
ignoring sanctions.
In the good old days, things were simple.
 States and persons targeted by sanctions were
well known, providing insurers with some level of
predictability when evaluating and
underwriting risks (e.g., Cuba, Iran).
Today, the playing field has changed.
 The United States’ ever-expanding sanctions
programs and lists of Specially Designated
Nationals (SDNs) present new challenges for
insurers and reinsurers.


Russian oligarchs
Emerging terrorist groups
What does this mean for insurers/reinsurers?
 Many entities with whom business was done
routinely are now off-limits.

Entire books of business called into question.
 Increased diligence required at all stages:
 Underwriting: Can we issue this policy?
 Claims: Can we adjust this loss?
 Payment: Can we pay out on this loss?
 Can U.S. insurers remain competitive?
But there’s more!
 In addition to sanctions imposed by the U.S.,
companies must worry about sanctions imposed by
other countries and economic communities (e.g.,
EU).
 There are significant variations among the sanctions
imposed
Between a “block” and a hard place
 Some countries have “blocking” statutes or
regulations that forbid compliance with certain U.S.
sanctions (e.g., Cuba-focused sanctions).
 This puts some insurers in a tough position: comply
with U.S. sanctions programs or face penalties in
another (perhaps their home) country.
What can we do?
 Stay “in the know” when it comes to sanctions
 OFAC website: http://www.treasury.gov/resourcecenter/sanctions/Pages/regulations.aspx
 Check and recheck . . . and check again
 Use appropriate policy language
 Exclusions
 Geographical limitations
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
THE RISKS OF
REGULATORY UNCERTAINTY
Emergence
 Brought to the fore by Superstorm Sandy:

New Jersey Executive Order 107

Pronouncements from the New York Department of Financial
Services
Domestic Developments
 New York Insurance Circular Letter No. 8
 October 28, 2013
 http://www.dfs.ny.gov/insurance/circltr/2013/cl2013_08.pdf
International Developments
 The Canterbury/Christchurch Earthquakes

Canterbury Earthquake – September 4, 2010 (7.1 magnitude)

Christchurch Earthquakes

February 22, 2011 (7.1 magnitude)

June 13, 2011 (6.4 magnitude)
International Developments
 The Canterbury/Christchurch Earthquakes
International Developments
 Reinsurance in place, but…


Rates rose heavily
New reserving rules and regulations
 Implications for…



Loss modeling
Adjustment of “loss”
Concerns about nationalization
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF TRIA
Status of TRIA’s renewal
 Terrorism Risk Insurance
Act (TRIA)
 Initially passed in 2002
 Renewed in 2005 and 2007
 Set to expire on 12/31/14
Competing Bills
 Looks like TRIA renewal will happen . . . eventually.
 The U.S. Senate passed a bill approving TRIA’s
renewal in July.
 The House had passed its own bill in June, but has
not yet responded to the Senate’s bill with a new one
of its own.
 Senate and House bills must be reconciled.
Sticking Points
 Length of renewal
 Program bifurcation for nuclear, biological,
chemical, or radiological attacks
 Insurer co-pay percentages
 Program trigger points
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
BAD FAITH AS AN ELEMENT OF
PROPERTY CLAIMS
Origins
 Bad faith has long been an element of casualty claims
 More recent development in world of property
claims



Katrina
Rita
Wilma
 Bi-Economy Market, Inc. v. Harleysville Ins. Co. of
New York, 10 N.Y.3d 187, 886 N.E.2d 127 (2008)
Developments
 Case Law

Jane Street Holding LLC v. Aspen Am. Ins. Co., 2014 WL
28600 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2014)

Travel Re-Insurance Partners, Ltd. v. Liberty Travel, 2012
WL 1623855 (D.N.J. May 9, 2012)
Implications?
 Code Upgrades

Direct Claims

Reinsurance
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE &
ACCESS TO RECORDS
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
SUPPLY CHAIN RISK
Developments in Property
Reinsurance
WEATHER RISK
Final Thoughts
SIXTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM
OCTOBER 2, 2014
BUSINESS MATTERS
HARVARD CLUB
BACK BAY
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
LIABILITY UPDATE
A PANEL DISCUSSION
Our Esteemed Panel
 Randy Leffelman
Munich Re (Chicago)
 Bill Perry
Carter Perry Bailey (London)
 Jason T. Verdone
The Hartford
Cyber Liability and
Data Breach
HERE TO STAY OR THE NEXT Y2K?
Recent Examples
J. Law
The Facts
 Cyber liability and data breach issues are
here to stay

Data breaches increased 20.5% during first six months of 2014
(Identity Theft Resource Center)

Home Depot and Target alone involved some 80 Million
customers
The Facts
 It is not a matter of if, but when the
company is likely to the hacked.

Advanced Persistent Threats (APT’s)
Advanced – sophisticated & organized attacks
 Advanced – Specific targeted attacks
 Persistent – Lateral movement
 Persistent – Maintains access to compromised infrastructure
 Threats – Extraction of personal information
 Threats – Attacks against critical infrastructure
 Threats – Industrial espionage/sabotage


Governments, Organized Crime, “Hacktivists”, Insiders
What are the Issues for Insurers
and Reinsurers?
Traditional Wisdom
 Case law involving cyber-liability has
largely focused on coverage under general
liability policies. But coverage case law will
begin to develop as cyber claims are
litigated under cyber liability forms
Sony (PlayStation) sought coverage under CGL in a NY
court – further raising awareness for the need for
separate enumerated coverage (cyber)
 Untested legal environment that varies from jurisdiction
to jurisdiction
 Unsettled legislative environment

GL Issues
 Coverage A

Is there physical damage to “tangible property”

Electronic data exclusions

What if there is damage to the system itself instead of just data
theft
GL Issues
 Coverage B

“”Personal and advertising injury”

“oral or written publication, in any manner, of material that
violates a person’s right of privacy”
Is There a “Publication”?
 Zurich v. Sony Corp.

Hackers stole personal information
Sony: Unauthorized use = publication
 Zurich: Must be the actions of the insured to constitute a
potentially covered publication

New York Trial Court
 ZURICH WINS
 But certainly not going to be the end of the case or the debate.
Restrictions on GL Coverage
 When in doubt, exclude it.
 2014 ISO form “Access or Disclosure of Confidential
or Personal Information Exclusion”
The Wording
 Coverage B excludes:

“Personal and advertising injury” arising out of any
access to or disclosure of any person’s or organization’s
confidential or personal information, including patents,
trade secrets, processing methods, customer lists,
financial information, credit card information, health
information or any other type of nonpublic information.
Excluded Damages
 This exclusion applies even if damages are claimed
for notification costs, credit monitoring expenses,
forensic expenses, public relations expenses, or any
other loss, cost or expense incurred by you or
others arising out of any access to or disclosure of
any person’s or organization’s confidential or
personal information.
Define It
 With respect to Coverage B Personal and Advertising
Injury Liability, paragraph 14.e of the Definitions
section does not apply.
 April 2013 ISO form.
The Market
 Cyber insurance market is big and getting much
bigger



Cyber insurance market is expected to grow to as much as $2B
77% of midsize-to-large companies plan to purchase cyber insurance
within the next 12 months (MRe)
Other policies can be implicated:





Cyber/Network/Privacy Liability
Directors and Officers (including shareholder derivative suits filed on the
company’s behalf)
Errors and Omissions
Commercial Crime
CGL
Solutions
 Cyber liability policy forms vary greatly and
cover a variety of first party and third-party
risks

Vendors may be required to purchase cyber insurance as
underwriters look into the risk management controls of the
entire supply chain.
First Party Cover

1st Party –
Data breach, security failure
 Loss of income/business/network interruption
 Data loss, hardware damage
 Forensic investigations, hardening of systems
 Notice/response costs, crisis management
 Cyber Extortion

Third Party Cover

3rd Party –
Data breach and network security failure
 Breach of privacy/regulations
 Negligence, breach of contract, Indemnity
 Media/multimedia liability
 Infections of 3rd party systems
 Other categories of costs—unlimited!!

The Future
 Internet of Things (IoT) – technology that
relies on sensors to collect data and can be
transmitted for analysis and real time
updates; Internet of Everything (IoE) – the
networked connection of people, processes,
data and things

Concern for insurance/reinsurance will be ever expanding use and
greater potential for disruption in the marketplace
Reinsurer Beware
 What is the exposure of your ceded risks?
 Who are you reinsuring?
 Are certain categories of business more vulnerable
than others?
 What forms are they using—consistency of
coverage
Class Action Update
 US Market—Cyber???
 United Kingdom and Europe
Employer Liability
 What are the “new” employment claims?
 Getting around the WC bar/Exclusive remedy
doctrine
 Insurer responses
Folta v. Ferro Eng.,
14 N.E.3d 717
(Ill. App. 2014)
 Exclusivity provisions of Illinois WC Act do not bar
claim against former employer for asbestos-related
diseases
 Worked at plant from 1966 to 1970
 Diagnosed with meso 41 years later
Exceptions to the Bar
 Injury not “accidental”
 Injury did not arise from “employment”
 Injury not received during course of “employment”
 Injury not “compensable” under the Act
The Court’s Answer
 Not compensable under the Act because:

Diagnosis was 41 years after employment and thus long after
the 15 year statute of repose

Long after 3 year statute of repose in Illinois Worker’s
Occupational Disease Act
The Court Observed
 “Through no fault of his own, plaintiff never had an
opportunity to seek compensation under the Act.”
 Thus, his injury was not “compensable”
Walston v. Boeing,
2014 WL 4648090
(Sept. 18, 2014)
 Exception to WC bar where employer deliberately
injures employee
 Operative test is whether “”the employer had actual
knowledge that an injury was certain to occur and
willfully disregards that knowledge”
A Matter of Proof
 Walston worked at Boeing 1956 to 1995 (lots of
asbestos around)
 Specific incident of exposure in 1985
 Failed to show that Boeing had knowledge that
injury was certain to occur.
Employer Liability
 What are the implications for the reinsurer?
Social Media
 #MREBAPanel2
 Twitter, Facebook, Instagram
New Exposures
 Employment
 Cyber-torts
 But if it isn’t private?
Predictive Modeling
 A new tool for the future
The Gloves are Off!
Can’t We Just Get Along?
 New Exposures Mean New Problems
 How is the dialogue evolving
 Are there are potential solutions
Cedent v. Reinsurer
Claim Administration
 Increased level of scrutiny by reinsurers
 Impact on the ceding companies
 Focus on GL/AL cases
 More claims oriented than accounting
Why Now?
 Internal pressure on reinsurers:




Reserving
Cash Flow
Amount/accuracy of claim data
Underwriting modeling and pricing
New Requirements
 The Dreaded Audit



Scheduling
Level of documentation
Scope of “access to records”
Does it Ever End?
 Claim files?
 Underwriting files?
 Legal files?
 Paper or electronic?
 Privilege issues?
 Confidentiality?
 Copying
Impacts
 Schedule F concerns
 More documents
 More follow up
 More pressure on brokers
The Buck Stops Here
The Impacts
 SLOWER Payments
 Internal pressure to collect
 Reduce turnaround time between direct payment
and reinsurer reimbursement
Any solutions?
 Electronic communications
 Improved data
 ACCORD messaging
 Web portals
 Secure system access
Questions and
Comments
 Randy Leffelman
 Jason Verdone
 Bill Perry
 John Harding
And Don’t Forget
#MREBA PANEL 2
Many Thanks.
SIXTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM
OCTOBER 2, 2014
BUSINESS MATTERS
HARVARD CLUB
BACK BAY
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
THE INTERMEDIARY’S PERSPECTIVE
on Program and Placement Trends,
and Dealing with Disputes
PANELISTS
JOHN CHAPLIN, COMPASS REINSURANCE CONSULTING
DAVE MACINTOSH, AON BENFIELD
MATT STANWOOD, JLT TOWERS RE
MIKE MULLINS, DAY PITNEY
MODERATOR
SUSAN HARTNETT, SUGARMAN ROGERS
reinsurance intermediaries
Brokers who act as intermediaries between reinsurers
and ceding companies. For the reinsurer, intermediaries
operate as an outside sales force. They also act as
advisers to ceding companies in assessing and locating
markets that meet their reinsurance needs.
IRMI.com
Intermediary
A reinsurance broker who negotiates contracts of
reinsurance on behalf of the reinsured, receiving a
commission for placement and other services
rendered. Under the terms of one widely used
intermediary clause, premiums paid a broker by a
reinsured are considered paid to the reinsurer, but loss
payments and other funds (such as premium
adjustments) paid a broker by a reinsurer are not
considered paid to the reinsured until actually received
by the reinsured.
Guycarp.com
Key Functions Performed by Reinsurance
Intermediaries
 Developing Reinsurance Programs on Behalf of
Ceding Companies
Understanding the ceding company’s goals
 Understanding risk being reinsured
 Perform catastrophe and other modeling for clients
 Evaluate the most cost effective means to achieve the
ceding company’s financial objectives (i.e. Traditional
Market or Capital Market)

Emerging Risks and Modeling
Key Functions Performed by Reinsurance
Intermediaries
 Placing Reinsurance on Behalf of a Ceding Company




Client Advocate
Understanding the market
Evaluating market security
Educating reinsurers about the ceding company and program
and securing participation
Key Functions Performed by Reinsurance
Intermediaries
 Placing Reinsurance on Behalf of a Ceding Company
 Negotiating terms and conditions of coverage, which includes
obtaining ceding company’s approval of terms and conditions
prior to going to market
 Identifying the broker’s compensation and obtain ceding
company’s approval of compensation prior to binding lines
 Contract drafting expertise
Reinsurance
Intermediaries should
seek to keep their clients
informed and aware of all
of the available options in
contract wording.
Key Functions Performed by Reinsurance
Intermediaries
 Administering the Reinsurance Contracts
 Acting as the conduit for information
 Collecting and transferring premium, commissions and
handling claims information (i.e. tracking reserves and
transferring loss payments)
 Managing the relationship to avoid disputes
And if Disputes Between Cedents and Reinsurers
Cant Be Avoided . . .
Is the intermediary
caught in the middle?
Disputes Between Cedents and Reinsurers
Whose agent is the intermediary?
Disputes Between Cedents and Reinsurers
Arbitration/Litigation
subpoenas and document
requests - where are those
old contract files, anyway?
The Intermediary’s Perspective:
Topic for Discussion
Is the business of reinsurance
changing?
What are the key drivers in the purchase
and placement of reinsurance today?
 What are cedents’ goals in today’s market?
 What does the market look like?
 What risks are being reinsured and how?
 Is the broker’s role changing?
 How may this impact parties down the road?
“Traditional” Functions of Reinsurance

Finance
The Company can write more business

Stabilization
The Company can reduce fluctuations in results from year to
year

Capacity
The Company can write larger policies

Catastrophe
The Company can protect itself from a major loss occurrence
MReBA’s Sixth Annual Symposium
Business Matters – Industry Trends in 2014
October 2, 2014
Prepared by Aon Benfield
Legal Disclaimer
David’s comments are his alone and may or may not
be representative of Aon Benfield’s position or point
of view.
State of The Market

“The global reinsurance market is in the depths of a tough market cycle. Intense market
competition, sluggish cedent demand, in addition to the onslaught of alternative capital, which is
anticipated to drive down prices even further, have been cited as the main contributing reasons
for the downgrade market outlook from stable to negative from all leading rating agencies.” –
Swiss Re’s CUO Matt Weber, at Monte Carlo Rendezvous

“The traditional reinsurance model is not just under threat from alternative capital, insurance
linked securities (ILS) and capital market investors, but also from external sources, such as
corporations and technology companies that could become substitute providers of risk
protection.” – S&P

“… (a) high volume of catastrophe bonds coupled with 11 sidecar transactions totaling $1.4
billion and collateralized reinsurance vehicles, allowed alternative capital to capture
approximately a 20 percent market share of property catastrophe reinsurance volume in the 12
month period leading up to June 30, 2014” - ” Aon Benfield’s, “Capital Revolution – Alternative
Markets Fuel Dynamic Environment”

“ … the broadening of investment by ILS investors further eats into the territory of traditional
reinsurers, which forces them to shift capacity to other lines of business where demand can be
stagnant.” - Moody’s Vice President and Senior Credit Officer Kevin Lee, at a recent London
press conference

“The pressure on reinsurance pricing is so intense that it would take two simultaneous “shock
scenarios” to turn rates upward again.” - S&P
Reinsurance Supply Evolution Continues
 Global reinsurer capital continued to increase in Q2 2014, up USD15 billion from Q1 to USD570
billion, and up USD 30 billion, or 6 per cent from year end 2013.
 Capital market investors participation continues to expand
 Pricing effect of ongoing convergence is testing the ability of ‘traditional’ capacity providers to adapt
to the changing market environment
Source: Individual company reports, Aon Benfield Analytics
Bond and Collateralized Market Development
 Non-traditional market capital has increased 18 percent since year end 2013 to USD58.6 billion
 All segments have seen strong increases in 2014 with collateralized ILW capacity up nearly 100
percent to USD3.5 billion
Source: Aon Benfield Securities, Inc.
Catastrophe Bond Issuance by Year, 2005 to 2014
(Years ending June 30)
Source: Aon Benfield Securities, Inc.
Form of Transaction
Source: Aon Benfield, Aon Benfield Securities, Inc.
An Intermediary’s Role In
Arbitration
Topics For Discussion
 Background | The Intermediary Clause
 Panel Subpoenas | The FAA
 Intermediaries As Arbitration Parties
Intermediary Clause (1)
(Intermediary Name) is hereby recognized as the
Intermediary negotiating this Contract for all
business hereunder.
All communications…relating thereto shall be
transmitted to the Company or the Reinsurer
through (Intermediary Name and Address).
Brokers & Reinsurance Markets Assoc., Clause 23A
The Intermediary Clause
 Intermediary as Conduit of Information
Intermediary Clause (2)
Payments by the Company to the Intermediary shall
be deemed to constitute payment to the Reinsurer.
Payments by the Reinsurer to the Intermediary shall
be deemed to constitute payment to the Company
only to the extent that such payments are
actually received by the Company.
Brokers & Reinsurance Markets Assoc., Clause 23A
The Intermediary Clause
 Intermediary as Conduit of Information
 Intermediary as Holder of Funds


Premium Dollars Flowing From Cedent
Claim Dollars Flowing From Reinsurer
Credit Risk of Intermediary
 In re: Pritchard & Baird, Inc.,
8 B.R. 265 (D. N.J. 1980) affirmed
673 F.2d 1299 (3d Cir. 1981)
Intermediary Clause (2)
Payments by the Company to the Intermediary shall
be deemed to constitute payment to the Reinsurer.
Payments by the Reinsurer to the Intermediary shall
be deemed to constitute payment to the Company
only to the extent that such payments are
actually received by the Company.
Brokers & Reinsurance Markets Assoc., Clause 23A
Intermediary Clause (1)
(Intermediary Name) is hereby recognized as the
Intermediary negotiating this Contract for all
business hereunder.
All communications…relating thereto shall be
transmitted to the Company or the Reinsurer
through (Intermediary Name and Address).
Brokers & Reinsurance Markets Assoc., Clause 23A
Panel Subpoenas
“The arbitrators … may summon in writing any
person to attend before them or any of them as a
witness and in a proper case to bring with him or
them any book, record, document, or paper which
may be deemed material as evidence in the case.”
9 USCS §7
Panel Subpoenas
 Available Legal Arguments
 Business Considerations



Current Clients
Former Clients, Active In The Market
Former Clients In Runoff
Intermediary As Arbitration Party
 International Ins. Agency Services, LLC,
2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22229
(N.D Ill. 2007)
THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS
MReBA SUSTAINING MEMBER FIRMS
Descargar

Slide 1