Insurance Law Monthly

Hanwha Non-Life Insurance Co Ltd v Alba Pte Ltd [2011] SGHC 271 is the first reported reinsurance decision in Singapore. The dispute raised a number of issues between the parties, the two most important being whether the reinsurers had the right to decline a declaration made to them under a reinsurance facility, and whether the terms of the underlying policy form had been incorporated into the reinsurance. The conclusions of Tan Lee Meng J are fully consistent with the analysis of the English courts on those matters.

Insurance and reinsurance disputes are often preceded by jurisdictional battles. This is unsurprising, because the place in which a case is heard will be significant for a determination of the law applicable to the contract in question and the application of the rules of construction under that law. In Faraday Reinsurance Co Ltd v Howden North America Inc and Anr [2011] EWHC 2837 (Comm) London market insurers were keen to keep a dispute concerning asbestos coverage out of the US courts, fearing far wider liability under the policy than they would face in England. The issue was whether insurers were entitled bring proceedings in England for a declaration as to the law applicable to the policy.

In Westport Insurance Corporation and Ors v Gordian Runoff Ltd [2011] HCA 37 arbitrators ruled that reinsurers were liable to the reinsured in that the losses fell within the scope of a reinsurance treaty. An appeal from that decision has, over a period of years, filtered up to the High Court of Australia, which has by a majority overturned the original award on a number of grounds, including error of law and failure by the arbitrators to give adequate reasons.