The Reinsurance Contract

Noussia, Kyriaki

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-45146-1_2

Kyriaki Noussia²

682 Accesses

Abstract

Reinsurance contracts are formed on the basis of ordinary rules of contract law but are also subject to the usages of this particular trade; for, such usages are of great importance. Reinsurance contracts are in writing. In addition, binders are being used in reinsurance contracts and are fully effective. A typical reinsurance contract is a relatively short and concise document containing the clauses with the names of the parties, the terms, the reinsurance clause, the amount expressed as proportion or excess point and limit and the premium or formula for calculating it. Exclusions also exist and are important, in both proportional and excess loss treaties. Reinsurance may be also subject to implied terms. There is no reason for reinsurance contracts not to be interpreted and construed according to the general rules for contracts; however, the special nature of reinsurance arrangements makes it imperative that arbitral tribunals consider industry custom and practice in interpreting reinsurance contracts. Reinsurance transactions are a matter of “utmost good faith”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Quinta Commc’ns v Warrington (2000) Lloyd’s Rep. IR 81.
2.
Reliastar Life Ins. Co. v IOA Re, Inc, 303 F.3d 874, 881–882 (8th Cir. 2002); Thomas and Lyons (2012), pp. 72–78.
3.
Thomas and Lyons (2012), pp. 72–79.
4.
Imperial F. Ins. Co. v Home Ins. Co (1985 CA5 La) 68 F 698; Fireman’s Fund ins. Co. v Aachen & Munich Fire Ins. Co. (1906) 2 Cal App 690, 84 P 253; Insurance Co. of North America v Hibernia Ins. Co. (1891) 140 US 565, 570, 35 L Ed 517, 11 S Ct 909; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
5.
Jackson v St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., (1885) 99 NY 124, 1 NE 539; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
6.
American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. v Eagle Star Ins. Co. (1954, CA9 Cal) 216 F2dd 176; Tokio Marine & Fire Ins. Co. v National Union Fire Ins. Co. (1937, CA2 NY) 91 F2d; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
7.
American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. v Eagle Star Ins. Co. (1954, CA9 Cal) 216 F2dd 176; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
8.
American Eagle Fire Ins. Co. v Eagle Star Ins. Co. (1954, CA9 Cal) 216 F2dd 176, 178; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
9.
Thomas and Lyons (2012), pp. 72–79.
10.
Progressive Casualty Ins. Co. v Reaseguradora Nacional de Venezuela (1992, SD NY) 802 F Supp 1069; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
11.
Progressive Casualty Ins. Co. v Reaseguradora Nacional de Venezuela (1992, SD NY) 802 F Supp 1069; Staring (1993), § 11:1.
12.
Thomas and Lyons (2012), pp. 72–79.
13.
Exchange Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v Mutual Fire Ins. Co., (1915) 59 Pa Super 240.
14.
Wetherell v Sentry Reinsurance , Inc., (1990, ED Pa)743 F Supp 1157; Staring (1993), § 11:2.
15.
English Marine Insurance Act 1906, ss. 23, 24.
16.
Staring (1993), § 11:1.
17.
General Reinsurance Corp. v Fennia Patria (1983) 2 Lloyd’s Rep 287 (CA).
18.
Abrahams v Med. Re [1991]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 216.
19.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), § 3–21.
20.
Orion Insurance Co. Plc v Sphere Drake Insurance Plc [1990]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 465.
21.
Home Insurance Co. v Administratia Asigurarilor De Stat [1983]2 Lloyd’s Rep. 674.
22.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), § 3–22.
23.
Sphere Drake Insurance Plc v Denby [2000]2 Lloyd’s Rep. 550, QBD (Comm).
24.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), § 3–23.
25.
Staring (1993), § 11:2.
26.
Wetherell v Sentry Reinsurance , Inc., (1990, ED Pa)743 F Supp 1157.
27.
Youell v Bland Welch & Co. (1990)2 Lloyd’s Rep 423 (QB).
28.
Staring (1993), § 11:3.
29.
Wetherell v Sentry Reinsurance , Inc., (1990, ED Pa)743 F Supp 1157.
30.
Hamilton Life Ins. Co v Republic Nat. Life Ins. Co., (1969, CA2 NY) 408 F2d 606.
31.
General Reinsurance Corp. v Fennia Patria (1983) 2 Lloyd’s Rep 287 (CA).
32.
In General Reinsurance Corp. v Fennia Patria (1983) 2 Lloyd’s Rep 287 (CA) an amendment was proposed changing the excess point at which the reinsurance cover would attach. It has been initialled by only 2 of the 28 reinsurers on the contract when a major fire loss occurred, as to which it appeared that the amendment would affect the rights of all reinsurers. The circulation of the slip was halted and the reinsured sought to cancel it. The Court held on appeal that this was not feasible and that the amendment, if effective, was binding as to the two who signed it, and them only, since it was unacceptable to allow the reinsured an election to hold individual reinsurers to a contract or not, according to how he perceived his advantage after the loss; Staring (1993), § 11:3.
33.
Staring (1993), § 12:1.
34.
Staring (1993), § 12:1.
35.
IPCI Ltd v Old Republic Ins. Co (1991, ED Wis.), 758 F Supp 478; Staring (1993), § 12:1.
36.
English Marine Insurance Act 1906, s. 33; Iron Trades Mut. Ins. Co. v Companhia de Seguros Imperia, [1991] 1 Re LR 231, QB 1990; Staring (1993), § 12:3.
37.
Staring (1993), § 12:6.
38.
Staring (1993), § 12:7.
39.
Reliastar Life Ins. Co. v IOA Re, Inc, 303 F.3d 874, 881–882 (8th Cir. 2002); Thomas and Lyons (2012), pp. 72-10.
40.
Chalaron v Insurance Co of North America (1896) 48 La Ann 1582, 1585, 21 So 267, 269; Staring (1993), § 12:8.
41.
General Reinsurance Corp. v Fennia Patria (1983) 2 Lloyd’s Rep 287 (CA).
42.
Pacific & General Insurance Co. Ltd v Hazell [1997] LRLR 65.
43.
Cunliffe-Owen v Theather and Greenwood [1967] 1 WLR 1421; O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), pp. 3–20.
44.
Con-Stan Industries of Australia Pty Ltd v Norwich Winterthur Insurance (Australia) Ltd (1986) 64 ALR 481.
45.
Nelson v Dahl (1879) 12 Ch. D. 568.
46.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), pp. 3–21.
47.
Pink v American Surety Co. (1940) 283 NY 290, 28 NE2d 842; Staring (1993), § 12:8.
48.
Insurance Co. of North America v Hibernia Ins. Co. (1891) 140 US 565, 570, 35 L Ed 517, 11 S Ct 909, where the USA Supreme court impliedly recognised the force of usage or custom but also held that a usage of New Orleans could not prevail in Philadelphia, where it was not followed or perhaps even known; Staring (1993), § 12:8.
49.
Unigard Sec. Ins. Co. v North River Ins. Co., 4 F.3d 1049, 1065/2d Cir. 1993); International Surplus Lines Ins. Co v Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., No 88 C32 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29,1989); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-4.
50.
Unigard Sec. Ins. Co. v North River Ins. Co., 4 F.3d 1049, 1065 /2d Cir. 1993); In Re Pritchard & Baird Inc., 8 B.R. 265, 270–271 (D.N.J. 1980); Arkwright-Boston Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v Calvert Fire Ins. Co., 887 F.2d 437, 440 (2d. Cir. 1989); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-5.
51.
Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-5.
52.
Christiania Gen. Ins. Corp. v Great Am. Ins. Co., F.2d 268,278 (2d. Cir. 1992); Westchester Resco Co v New England Reins. Corp., 818 f.2d 2, 3 (2d Cir. 1987); Travellers Ins. Co. v Central Natal Ins. Co., 733 F. Supp. 522, 528 (D.Conn. 1990); Justice v Stuyvesant Ins. Co., 265 F. Supp. 63, 65–66 (S.D.W.Va. 1967); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-5.
53.
Garza v Marine Transport Lines, Inc., 861 F.2d 23,27 (2d. Cir. 1988); Walk-In Medical Centers, Inc. v Breuer Capital Corp., 861 F.2d 23,27 (2d. Cir. 1988); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-6.
54.
Affiliated FM Ins. Co v Constitution Reins, Corp., 416 Mass. 839, 846, 626 N.E.2d 878, 882 (1994); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-7.
55.
Affiliated FM Ins. Co v Constitution Reins, Corp., 416 Mass. 839, 846, 626 N.E.2d 878, 882 (1994).
56.
Travelers Ins. Co. v Central Natl Ins. Co., 733 F. Supp. 522, 528 (D.Conn. 1990); Ostrager and Vyskocil (1996), p. 5-9.
57.
Staring (1993), § 13:1.
58.
Youell v Bland Welch & Co (1990) 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 423 QB; Staring (1993), § 13:3.
59.
Glasgow Assurance Corp. v William Symondson & Co 16 Com Cas 109, 110–111.
60.
Forsokringsakteselskapet Vesta v Butcher (1989)1 Lloyd’s Rep 331.
61.
Staring (1993), § 13:3.
62.
Forsokringsakteselskapet Vesta v Butcher (1989)1 Lloyd’s Rep 331, at 337.
63.
Home Insurance Co. of New York v Victoria-Montreal Fire Insurance Co. [1907] AC 59.
64.
Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd v Sea Insurance Co Ltd [1996] LRLR 265.
65.
Australia Widows Fund Life Assurance Society Ltd v National Mutual Life Association of Australia Ltd [1914] AC 634.
66.
Australia Widows Fund Life Assurance Society Ltd v National Mutual Life Association of Australia Ltd [1987]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 476.
67.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), pp. 4–08.
68.
Thomas and Lyons (2012), p. 72-20.
69.
Barnards v Faber [1893] 1 QB 340; Bancroft v Heath (1901) 17 TLR 425; Walker & Sons v Uzielli (1896) Com Cas 452; The Sulphite Pulp Co Ltd v Faber (1895–1896) 1 Com Cas 146; Beauchamp v Faber (1898) 3 Com Cas 308; Gurses (2010), p. 51.
70.
Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd v Unione Italiana Anglo Saxon Reinsurance Co Ltd [1987] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 476; Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd v Sea Insurance Co Ltd [1996] CLC 1515, 1527; Gurses (2010), p. 51.
71.
Thomas and Lyons (2012), p. 72-25.
72.
Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd v Unione Italiana Anglo Saxon Reinsurance Co Ltd [1987] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 476; Gurses (2010), p. 51.
73.
Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd v Sea Insurance Co Ltd [1996] CLC 1515; Home Insurance Company of New York v Victoria—Montreal Fire Insurance Company [1907] AC 59; Gurses (2010), p. 51.
74.
Australian Widows’ Fund Life Assurance Society, Ltd v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia [1914] AC 634; Gurses (2010), p. 51.
75.
CNA International Reinsurance Co Ltd v Companhia de Seguros Tranquilidade SA [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 289; Gurses (2010), p. 56.
76.
North River Ins Co v CIGNA Reinsurance Co 52 F.3d 1194 (3rd Cir. (NJ) Apr 13, 1995).
77.
Gurses (2010), p. 165.
78.
Gurses (2010), p. 168.
79.
Staring (1993), § 14:1.
80.
Milwaukee Mechanics’ Ins. Co. v Palatine Ins. Co (1900) 128 Cal 71, 75, 60 P 518; Staring (1993), § 14:2.
81.
Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co v Liberty Bell Ins. Co (1936)16 Cal App 2d 76, 60 P2d 200; Staring (1993), § 14:2.
82.
Manhattan Life Ins. Co v Prussian Life Ins. Co (1924, CA2 NY) 296 F 39; Staring (1993), § 14:2.
83.
Staring (1993), § 14:3.
84.
Fenton Insurance Co. Ltd v Gothaer Versicherungsbank VVaG [1997]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 172.
85.
Figre Ltd v Mander Unreported, Jan. 27, 1998.
86.
Pacific & General Insurance Co. Ltd. v Hazell [1997] LRLR 65.
87.
O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), § 3–25.
88.
Excess Insurance Co v Mathews (1925) 23 Ll.L.R. 71.
89.
In River Thames Insurance Co Ltd v Al Ahleia Insurance Co. Ltd [1973] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 2, Lord Denning M.R. described the contract as a “follow the fortunes ” treaty; O’Niell and Woloniecki (1998), § 5–09.
90.
Staring (1993), § 18:1.
91.
Insurance Co of Africa v SCOR (UK) Reinsurance Co Ltd, [1985] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 312.
92.
Insurance Co of Africa v SCOR (UK) Reinsurance Co Ltd, [1985] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 312.
93.
Gurses (2010), p. 113.
94.
Michigan TP Participating Plan v Federal Ins Co, 233 Mich App 422, (Mich. App. Jan 19, 1999).
95.
Hastie v De Peyster 3 Cai R. 190, NY Sup. 1805.
96.
New York State Marine Ins Co v Protection Ins Co 18 F. Cas 160 (CC Mass 1841).
97.
Gurses (2010), p. 132.
98.
Hayter v Nelson & Home Insurance Co. [1990] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 265.
99.
CGU International Insurance v AstraZeneca Insurance Co., [2006] Lloyd’s Rep IR 409. Gurses (2010). Reinsuring Clauses, London. Lloyd’s List, 134.
100.
Gurses (2010), p. 135.
101.
American International Marine Agency of New York Inc v Dandridge [2005] Lloyd’s Rep IR 643; Toomey v Banco Vitalicio De Espana SA de Seguros [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 354; HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd v New Hampshire Insurance Co [2001] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 161; Mann v Lexington Insurance Co [2001] Lloyd’s Rep IR 179; Reliance Marine Insurance v Duder [1913] 1 KB 265; Citadel Insurance Co v Atlantic Union Insurance Co SA [1982] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 543.
102.
Gurses (2010), p. 33.
103.
Gan Insurance v Tai Ping Insurance (No 1) [1999] Lloyd’s Rep IR 472.
104.
AXA Reinsurance (U.K.) Plc. v Field [1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 233; American Centennial Insurance Company v Insco Limited [1996] LRLR 407; Municipal Mutual Ins Ltd v Sea Ins Co Ltd [1996] CLC 1515; Goshawk Syndicate Management Ltd v XL Speciality Insurance Co [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 683.
105.
Gurses (2010), p. 34.
106.
GE Reinsurance Corp (formerly Kemper Reinsurance Co) v New Hampshire Insurance Co [2004] Lloyd’s Rep IR 404.
107.
Gurses (2010), p. 2.
108.
The full reinsurance clause is worded as follows: “Being a reinsurance of and warranted same gross rate, terms and conditions as and to follow the settlements of the company and that said company retains during the currency of this policy at least … on the identical subject matter and risk and in identically the same proportion on each separate part thereof, but in the event of the retained line being less than as above, underwriters’ lines to be proportionately reduced.”; Gurses (2010), p. 3.
109.
For example what is the purpose of inserting “as original ” as a policy wording? Does the phrase “as original” incorporate the direct policy terms into reinsurance or does it simply confirm that original insurance and reinsurance are back-to-back and provide identical cover?; Gurses (2010), p. 3.
110.
Gurses (2010), p. 3.
111.
Toomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd (No 1) [1994] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 516.
112.
Wasa International Insurance Co Ltd v Lexington Insurance Co [2009] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 508, 518.
113.
Gurses (2010), p. 4.
114.
Employer Reinsurance Corp v Laurier Indem Co 2007 WL 1831775 (MD Fla); Ott v AllStar Ins Corp 99 Wis.2d 635, (Wis. Jan 06, 1981).
115.
Ott v All-Star Ins Corp 99 Wis.2d 635, (Wis. Jan 06, 1981).
116.
Travelers Cas and Sur Co v Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London 96 NY.2d 583, (NY Oct 16, 2001).
117.
North River Ins Co v CIGNA Reinsurance Co 52 F.3d 1194 (3rd Cir. (NJ) April 13, 1995).
118.
Travelers Cas and Sur Co v Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London 96 NY.2d 583, (NY Oct 16, 2001).
119.
Christiania General Ins Corp of New York v Great American Ins Co 979 F.2d 268, CA 2 (NY), 1992; Unigard Sec Ins Co, Inc v North River Ins Co 79 NY.2d 576, (NY, May 05, 1992); Progressive Cas Ins Co v CA Reaseguradora Nacional De Venezuela 991 F.2d 42 (2nd Cir. (NY) April 06, 1993). Gurses (2010), p. 6.
120.
North River Ins Co v CIGNA Reinsurance Co 52 F.3d 1194 (3rd Cir. (NJ) April 13, 1995).
121.
Gurses (2010), p. 7.
122.
Gurses (2010), pp. 7–8.
123.
Insurance Co of Africa v Scor (UK) Reinsurance Co Ltd [1985] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 312.
124.
Gurses (2010), p. 9.
125.
Staring (1993), § 21:1.
126.
Staring (1993), § 21: 2.
127.
Staring (1993), § 21:4.
128.
Staring (1993), § 21:5.
129.
Staring (1993), § 22:2.
130.
Associated Electric & Gas Insurance Services Ltd v European Reinsurance Co of Zurich [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 253; Lincoln National Life Insurance Co v Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada [2005] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 606.
Gurses (2010), p. 107.
131.
Gurses (2010), p. 107.
132.
North River Ins Co v CIGNA Reinsurance Co 52 F.3d 1194, (3rd Cir. (NJ) Apr. 13, 1995); Gurses (2010), p. 107.
133.
Pacific Reinsurance Management Corp. v Ohio Reinsurance Corp. 935 F2d 1019, 1022–1023, 91 CDOS 4344, 91 Daily Journal DAR 6565 (9th Cir. Cal. 1991); Insco Limited v Meadows Indemnity Co., 1993 WL 328376, Docket no CV 90 2935 SVW, 4 Mealey’s Reins Rep, No. 5, C (CD Cal. 1993); Yasuda Fire & Marine Ins. Co. of Europe v Continental Casualty Co., 37 F3dd 345 (7th Cir. Ill. 1994); Meadows Indemnity Co. v Arkwright Mutual Ins. Co., 1996 WL 557513, Docket No. 88-0600, 7 Mealey’s Reins. Rep. No 11, F (ED Pa 1996); See Ch. 22, § 22:7, G S Staring, Law of Reinsurance , CBC, NY, 1993.
134.
Gurses (2010), p. 64; Bremer Vulkan Schiffbau und Maschinenfabrik v South India Shipping Corporation Ltd [1981] AC 909; Heyman v Darwins [1942] AC 356; Black Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof-Aschaffenburg AG [1981] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 446; Harbour Assurance Co (UK) Ltd v Kansa General International Insurance Co Ltd [1993] QB 701.
135.
Gurses (2010), pp. 64–65.
136.
Pine Top Insurance Co v Unione Italiana Anglo Saxon Reinsurance Co. [1978]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 476.
137.
Gurses (2010), pp. 65–66.
138.
Excess Insurance Co Ltd & Anor v Mander [1995] CLC 838; American International Speciality Lines Insurance Co v Abbott Laboratories [2003] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 267; Cigna Life Insurance Co of Europe SA-NV & Ors v Intercaser SA de Seguros y Reaseguros [2001] CLC 1356; OK Petroleum AB v Vitol Energy SA [1995] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 160; Gurses (2010), p. 67.
139.
Pine Top Insurance Co v Unione Italiana Anglo Saxon Reinsurance Co. [1978]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 476.
140.
Axa v Ace Global Markets [2006] Lloyd’s Rep IR 683.
141.
Axa v Ace Global Markets [2006] Lloyd’s Rep IR 683.
142.
Gurses (2010), p. 66.
143.
AIG Europe SA v QBE International Insurance Ltd [2001]2 Lloyd’s Rep. 268.
144.
Excess Insurance Co Ltd v Mander [1997]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 119.
145.
Gurses (2010), p. 66.
146.
Pine Top Insurance Co v Unione Italiana Anglo Saxon Reinsurance Co. [1978]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 476.
147.
Excess Insurance Co Ltd v Mander [1997]1 Lloyd’s Rep. 119.
148.
Trygg Hansa Insurance Co Ltd v Equitas Ltd [1998]2 loyd’s Rep. 439, applied in Cigna Life Insurance Co of Europe SA-NV & Ors v Intercaser SA de Seguros y Reaseguros [2001] CLC 1356; Gurses (2010), p. 67.
149.
Gurses (2010), p. 67.
150.
Under New York state law.
151.
Aetna Cas and Sur Co v Home Ins Co 882 F. Supp. 1328, (SDNY, March 27, 1995); Travelers Cas and Sur Co v Ace American Reinsurance Co 392 F. Supp.2d 659, SDNY, Oct 12, 2005.; aff’d by the Second Circuit: 201 Fed. Appx. 40, (2nd Cir. (NY) Oct 18, 2006); Gurses (2010), p. 92.
152.
Gurses (2010), p. 92.
153.
Progressive Cas Ins Co v CA Reaseguradora Nacional De Venezuela 991 F.2d. 42, (2nd Cir. (NY) Apr 6, 1993).
154.
Gurses (2010), p. 92.
155.
Referring to Level Export Corp v Wolz, Aiken & Co , 305 NY 82, 87, (NY Feb 26, 1953); Gurses (2010), p. 93.
156.
Citing Compania Espanola de Petroleos, SA v Nereus Shipping, SA, 527 F.2d 966, 973 (2d Cir. Dec 12, 1975), cert. denied, 426 US 936, 96 S Ct 2650, 49 L.Ed.2d 387 (1976); Gurses (2010), p. 93.
157.
Gurses (2010), p. 93.
158.
Cigna Life Insurance Company of Europe SA NV & Ors v Intercaser SA de Seguros y Reaseguros [2001] CLC 1356.
159.
Unum Life Insurance Co of America v The Israel Phoenix Assurance Co Ltd [2001] unreported.
160.
Leedham and Linker (2002).
161.
Anonymous Greek Co of General Insurances (“The Ethniki”) v AIG Europe (UK) & Ors, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep. 34.
162.
Leedham and Linker (2002).
163.
Zeller (2000), p. 182.
164.
Unigard Sec. Ins. Co. v North River Ins. Co., 4F 3d 1049, 1054 (2d Cir. 1993).
165.
Mutuelle Generale Francaise Vie v Life Assurance Co of Pennsylvania, 688 F. Supp. 386 (N.D. III, 1988); American Reinsurance Co v MGIC Inv. Corp. No 77 CH 1457 (Ill Cir. Ct. Ch. Cook County Oct. 20, 1987).
166.
Christiania Gen. Ins. Corp v Great Am. Ins. Co., 979 F.2d 268, 280–281; Zeller (2000), pp. 185–186.
167.
Zenith Insurance Co. v Employers Insurance of Wasau, 141 F3d 300 (7th Cir. 1998).
168.
Zenith Insurance Co. v Employers Insurance of Wasau, 141 F3d 300 (7th Cir. 1998) at 308.
169.
Zeller (2000), p. 190.
170.
Thomas (1992), p. 1597.

References

Gurses O (2010) Reinsuring clauses. Lloyd’s List, London
Google Scholar
Leedham R, Linker S (2002) Reinsurance disputes: how, where and who to sue. Bus Law Rev 23:86
Article Google Scholar
Staring GS (1993) Law of reinsurance . CBC, New York
Google Scholar
O’Niell PJ, Woloniecki J (1998) The law of reinsurance . Sweet and Maxwell, London
Google Scholar
Ostrager BR, Vyskocil MK (1996) Modern reinsurance law and practice. Glasser Legal Works, Little Falls
Google Scholar
Thomas JE, Lyons S (eds) (2012) New Appleman on insurance law – library edition, vol 7, Property insurance (chapters 71–79 §§ 71.01–79.06). Lexis Nexis, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Thomas SW (1992) Utmost good faith in reinsurance: a tradition in need of adjustment. Duke Law J 41:1548
Article Google Scholar
Zeller MC (2000) Divergent conceptions of the reinsurance doctrine of utmost good faith. In: Diaconis J, Gurevitz M (eds) Reinsurance law and practice. New legal & business developments in a changing global environment. Practising Law Institute, New York, pp 182–195
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Athens, Greece
Kyriaki Noussia

Authors

Kyriaki Noussia
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Noussia, K. (2013). The Reinsurance Contract. In: Reinsurance Arbitrations. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45146-1_2

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45146-1_2
Published: 18 December 2013
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-45145-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-45146-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics