Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Insurance Industry Takes Another Swing at Efficient Dispute Resolution
The widespread use of arbitration in insurance and reinsurance disputes was intended to allow parties to resolve complex disputes quickly and efficiently by having persons with knowledge of the specialized terminology, standards, and practices of the insurance industry act as decision makers. This aspiration has been superseded by protracted and voluminous discovery, continual delays and postponements, extensive briefing, and lengthy hearings. In essence, all of the foibles of litigation have crept into the world of arbitration, leaving the insurance industry once again in search of an efficient method to resolve disputes.
Last year, the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution ('CPR'), in consultation with leading insurers and law firms in the London and American insurance markets, advanced a new International Reinsurance Industry Dispute Resolution Protocol (the 'Protocol') to provide the insurance industry with an alternative to litigation or lengthy arbitration. CPR has been involved in the property-casualty insurance community for more than 20 years and maintains an active Insurance Committee composed of representatives of insurance companies that meet at least twice a year to consider new tools to advocate and support alternative dispute resolution within the insurance industry. CPR also has a Corporate Insurance Coverage Committee consisting of representatives of corporate policyholders, commercial insurers, and coverage and defense counsel. This committee creates and promulgates methods for managing policyholder coverage disputes without litigation.
CPR has offered the Protocol as a statement of 'best practices' to resolve disputes early and efficiently. While focused on reinsurance disputes, the Protocol is meant to apply to insurers, insureds, agents and brokers, as well as reinsurers. A copy of the Protocol and further information regarding CPR can be found at www.InsuranceMediation.org. While somewhat idealistic, the Protocol does offer expedited procedures to bring parties to the table. If, however, the parties to
the dispute either have not adopted the Protocol or are not willing to settle their dispute, the Protocol may serve only as an additional layer to the dispute resolution process.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?