Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (“TRIA”), 15 USC '6701 et. seq., designed to make terrorism insurance readily available to property owners, is scheduled to sunset on Dec. 31, 2005. If the Act is not extended and the cost of terrorism insurance becomes prohibitive, lenders and borrowers may once again find themselves embroiled in controversy over the question of whether governing loan documents require such insurance.
TRIA
Prior to 9/11, terrorism insurance was typically issued without additional charge in about 70% of all insurance policies. (U.S. Department of the Treasury, Report to Congress Assess-ment: The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, June 30, 2005.) By 2003, the number of insurance companies offering terrorism insurance at no cost dropped to slightly under 40%, as part of an industrywide effort to curtail terrorism coverage. After the events of 9/11, the National Council of Compensation Insurers recommended the use of blanket terrorism exclusions.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?