In Century Indemnity Company v. Paladin Reinsurance Corp., Civil Action No. 05-3755, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Court denied a motion to stay the confirmation of an arbitration award on equitable or prudential grounds, due to the insolvency of the party against which the award had been entered. The Court rejected the arguments that confirmation would provide the holder of the award an unfair advantage over other creditors, or that confirmation would interfere with ongoing regulatory proceedings before the New York Insurance Department.
Arbitration Process Issues
Aribtrators to decide whether to consolidate arbitration proceedings
In Employers Insurance Company of Wausau v. Century Indemnity Company, 2006 WL 851643 (7th Cir. April 4, 2006), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that whether an arbitration agreement contained in a reinsurance agreement prohibited consolidated arbitration with other reinsurers was a prodecural issue to be decided by arbitrators, rather than an in issue of arbitrability for courts to decide.
Arbitration compelled despite exception to agreement to arbitrate
Court compels arbitration of disputes with respect to two excess of loss reinsurance agreements covering medical malpractice liability insurance. The court interpreted an exception to the arbitration provision to be limited to disputes over the validity or formation of the reinsurance agreements. Medical Insurance Exchange of California v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London, 2006 WL 463531 (N.D. Cal. Feb., 24, 2006) (slip opinion).