Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

ACE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. GLOVAL

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
1:11-cv-06945 Search Pacer
Opposing Party: 
Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Southern District of New York
Date Filed: 
Oct 3 2011

"BACKGROUND

11. The underlying arbitration concerned Global's responsibility under two facultative reinsurance certificates for asbestos claims paid by CNIC under an umbrella excess policy issued to Wylain, Inc., now known as Marley-Wylain, Inc. ("Marley").

12. In a reinsurance contract, a reinsurer agrees to indemnify the reinsured against all or part of the loss that the reinsured may sustain under an insurance policy or policies the company has issued, in exchange for a portion of the premium paid to the reinsured for the
insurance policies.

13. A "facultative" reinsurance contract reinsures a specific insurance policy or risk, as opposed to "treaty" reinsurance, which reinsures multiple insurance policies or an entire book of business written by the reinsured.

14. CNIC (through Cravans Dargan & Company, Pacific Coast)2 issued an umbrella commercial liability excess of loss policy to its insured, Marley, effective August 1, 1979 to August 1, 1980 (the "Policy"). {See CNIC Policy No. CNU 03-48-63, attached as Exhibit D hereto.) 2 Cravens

15. The Policy provides indemnity limits of $25 million per occurrence and in the aggregate, excess of underlying insurance ($500,000 each occurrence and in the aggregate for products claims). (Id. at 1.)

16. The Policy is an "ultimate net loss" policy which includes both indemnity and defense costs within the policy limits. (Id. at 3.)

17. Gerling Global Reinsurance Corporation, as predecessor to Global, issued two facultative reinsurance certificates to CNIC, Global Facultative Certificate Nos. 73-30924 and 73-30925 (the "Global Certificates"). (See Exhibits B and C hereto.)

18. After the Global Certificates were executed, Marley and its corporate successors were named as defendants in many asbestos-related products personal injury claims and lawsuits. These claims and lawsuits were tendered to Marley's insurers, including CNIC, for defense and indemnity.

19. Pursuant to a December 2003 Settlement and Funding Agreement, and subject to the CNIC Policy, CNIC agreed to pay for a portion of the indemnity and defense costs associated with Marley's asbestos-related bodily injury claims.

20. Following prior notice, in December 2004, Global was provided a report which contained an overview of the claims, an explanation that defense is paid within policy limits, an explanation of the funding agreement and a status update on payments, which included an explanation of the prior aggregate impairment of the policy. Along with the report, Global received a copy of the Policy, the settlement and funding agreement and coverage counsel analysis. Global issued no response or inquiry.

21. Reporting continued, and by Spring of 2009, CNIC's payments to Marley exceeded the attachment point of Global Certificate 73-30924 (the lower of the two layers reinsured by Global).

22. CNIC submitted its first bill to Global in April 2009. (See April 29, 2009 Reinsurance Billing and Proof of Loss from E. Barrett to D. Annecchino, Exh E, hereto.) The reinsurance billing (consistent with the terms and conditions of the underlying CNIC Policy) combined indemnity and defense cost payments to meet the reinsurance retention and to make up the reinsurance "loss" under the reinsurance certificates.

23. In May 2009, Global refused to the pay the billing.

24. On March 19, 2010, CNIC initiated arbitration proceedings to recover the outstanding balance due from Global under Global Certificate 73-30924, as well as a declaration regarding Global's payment obligations for amounts which will become due under that certificate and Global Certificate 73-30925.

25. A panel of three arbitrators (the "Panel") was appointed and accepted by the parties at an Organizational Meeting on October 12, 2010, in New York, New York.

26. After a three-day hearing, the Panel issued is Final Award on June 3, 2011. (See Exhibit A.)

27. CNIC now petitions this Court to confirm the Final Award."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.