Reinsurance Focus

Reinsurers, Dornoch and others, sought a declaration that they were not liable under an Excess Physical Loss or Damage cover for losses sustained by the defendants, Mauritius Union Assurance (“MUA”), a Mauritian company which conducts both life and general insurance business. The Excess Reinsurance policy was written on a slip policy; the cover was excess 50 million Mauritian Rupees any one loss. It provided for “Premises” and “Transit” cover, but did not carry any general infidelity cover. It also provided for a 72 hour discovery period and contained a clause to follow all terms and conditions of the primary reinsurance policy.

The reinsurers argued they were not liable on the ground that the underlying losses were not of their nature within the physical loss or damage cover provided by the policy and that they were not discovered within the 72 hour discovery period. Additionally, they argued that the losses did not exceed the deductible (of MRS 50m x/s MRS 500,000) applicable to each loss under the policy.

The English High Court agreed with the reinsurers on all grounds. Specifically, it found that the reinsurers did not have any liability to MUA pursuant to the Excess Reinsurance because the described losses fell outside the scope of cover due to the fact that the losses sustained by the underlying insured were a direct result of employee infidelity. The court also concluded that none of the many losses alleged were discovered within 72 hours of their occurrence. Lastly, the court agreed that the underlying losses were not capable of meeting their applicable deductible of Maur Rup 50,000,000 any one loss. Dornoch Limited v. The Mauritius Union Assurance Company and Mauritius Commercial Bank, [2007] EWHC 155 (Comm. Feb. 6, 2007).