Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Companies that use captive insurance companies to manage risk are increasingly being victimized by excess insurance companies and reinsurers that participate in their insurance programs. Excess insurers and reinsurers know when they are insuring or reinsuring a risk that uses a captive insurer for claims handling and decision-making, yet when a large claim must be paid, they may feign surprise and seek to use the captive's relationship with the policyholder as a way to resist paying claims by casting suspicion on the captive's claims decisions. Captives and their owners can proactively avoid some of these common pitfalls.
Background
In a common captive insurance structure, a large company will create an insurance company subsidiary that collects premiums from the parent and other subsidiaries, sells them insurance, investigates and resolves claims, and perhaps handles other risk management functions. The captive will absorb the typical claims, but the corporate family will be protected from the largest losses by high-level excess insurance for the captive insurer itself, or reinsurance. This type of program may help to manage and spread a company's risks in an economically favorable fashion, with enhanced risk management oversight over developing problems and claims control. Through the underwriting process, excess insurers or reinsurers will know when they are writing insurance in excess of a captive's policy.
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?