• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Reinsurance Focus

New reinsurance-related and arbitration developments from Carlton Fields

  • About
    • Events
  • Articles
    • Treaty Tips
    • Special Focus
    • Market
  • Contact
  • Exclusive Content
    • Blog Staff Picks
    • Cat Risks
    • Regulatory Modernization
    • Webinars
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Reinsurance Regulation

Reinsurance Regulation

Court partially dismisses claims arising out of reserve dispute

January 8, 2007 by Carlton Fields

Converium Holding, a Swiss reinsurance company, issued an IPO in December 2001. Converium's North American unit collapsed in September 2004 after four increases in reserves in a single year. Class action lawsuits followed, alleging that management had grossly misrepresented necessary reserves and failed to disclose reserve disputes with the company's outside auditor. The District Court dismissed claims against the IPO's underwriter and broker and claims against the company and individual defendants relating to the IPO, denying dismissal of certain other claims. In re Converium Holding AG Securities Litigation, Case No. 04-7897 (USDC S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2006). This opinion illustrates the strategic problem of finding a solvent deep pocket in this type of situation, and discusses the “storm warning” doctrine, pursuant to which the Court found that the frequent increases to reserves, in increasing amounts, in a short period of time, put investors on notice of problems despite comfort statements by management.

Filed Under: Reorganization and Liquidation, Reserves, Week's Best Posts

Court upholds settlement of claims affecting reinsurance in liquidation of The Home

December 20, 2006 by Carlton Fields

The New Hampshire Supreme Court has upheld a settlement of disputes and claims involving insureds and reinsureds of The Home Insurance Company, which was placed in liquidation by the New Hampshire Commissioner of Insurance. Some of The Home's reinsurers opposed the settlement. The Court upheld the settlement as within the authority of the liquidator and the Court, and fair and reasonable. This process is interesting in part because the settlement had to be approved by creditors of The Home, by a Court in the UK and by the UK's insurance regulatory body, the Financial Services Agency. In the Matter of the Liquidation of The Home Ins. Co., Case No. 2005-740 (N.H. Dec. 5, 2006).

Filed Under: Reorganization and Liquidation, Week's Best Posts

Mississippi Supreme Court upholds assumption reinsurance agreement

December 14, 2006 by Carlton Fields

The Mississippi Supreme Court has affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of two insurance companies that entered into assumption reinsurance agreements to transfer workers' compensation risks to Legion Insurance. After Legion was placed in liquidation, the Mississippi Insurance Guaranty Association unsuccessfully attempted to hold the companies responsible for losses. The Court held that the agreements constituted a novation, removing the companies from the risk. Mississippi Ins. Guaranty Ass'n. v. MS Casualty Ins. Co., Case No. 2005-01158 (Oct. 26, 2006).

Filed Under: Reorganization and Liquidation

NAIC Reinsurance Task Force meeting summary

December 13, 2006 by Carlton Fields

The summary of the meetings of the NAIC's Reinsurance Task Force on December 9, 2006 and December 11, 2006 at the 2006 Winter Meeting has been posted on the NAIC's Internet site. It provides a brief description of the action taken on the proposed creation of the Reinsurance Evaluation Office to rate the financial strength of reinsurers as a basis for a collateral requirement, stating that the proposal should be “further refined” by the NAIC's Financial Condition (E) Committee no later than September 2007.

Filed Under: Accounting for Reinsurance, Reinsurance Regulation, Week's Best Posts

Connecticut Task Force recommends run-off regulation for solvent insurers

December 12, 2006 by Carlton Fields

A Task Force appointed by the Connecticut Insurance Commissioner has issued a report proposing the adoption of statutes and regulations to oversee the run-off of solvent companies. Such oversight would be exercised by the Department of Insurance. The report notes the experience of the UK in this area and moves to provide a similar mechanism in several states in the US.

Filed Under: Reorganization and Liquidation, Week's Best Posts

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 99
  • Page 100
  • Page 101
  • Page 102
  • Page 103
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 107
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Carlton Fields Logo

A blog focused on reinsurance and arbitration law and practice by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Focused Topics

Hot Topics

Read the results of Artemis’ latest survey of reinsurance market professionals concerning the state of the market and their intentions for 2019.

Recent Updates

Market (1/27/2019)
Articles (1/2/2019)

See our advanced search tips.

Subscribe

If you would like to receive updates to Reinsurance Focus® by email, visit our Subscription page.
© 2008–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · Disclaimers and Conditions of Use

Reinsurance Focus® is a registered service mark of Carlton Fields. All Rights Reserved.

Please send comments and questions to the Reinsurance Focus Administrators

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.