UK: England And New York - Convergence On "Follow The Settlements"?

Last Updated: 22 March 2013
Article by Kiran Soar and Rachel Bernie

In February 2013, the highest appellate court in New York issued its judgment in USF&G v American Reinsurance Co.1This confirms the high standard the reinsurer will need to satisfy to challenge its cedant's settlements. As such, it seems on the face of it that the English and New York courts now adopt a very similar position to follow settlements clauses.

Background to USF&G v American Reinsurance Co

The case concerned the underlying asbestos liabilities of Western Asbestos Company (Western) which dissolved in 1967. Western was repeatedly sued in the US. In 1993, Western sued USF&G seeking insurance coverage for these claims, and also alleged bad faith against USF&G. The litigation ensued for almost a decade. In the meantime, Western was left to handle the asbestos claims on its own. In the absence of defence costs being advanced by insurers, Western consented to default judgments being entered, with the plaintiff attorneys agreeing to stay execution of the judgment until the USF&G lawsuit was resolved (as Western had no other assets).

A settlement agreement was finally reached in 2002. Western was dissolved and USF & G paid $975 million to a trust established to compensate plaintiffs. The policies issued by USF&G contained "per person" and "per accident" limits in varying amounts. The settlement agreement did not allocate the loses to any particular policy year.

USF&G, in consultation with MacArthur, allocated the loss to the 1959 policy year as this had the highest per-person limits ($200,000) which had the effect of maximising USF&G's available reinsurance. The reinsurance was a $200,000 xs $100,000 policy for any loss occurring during the period covered by the policy. USF&G calculated the reinsurers' obligation to it at approximately $391 million, which reinsurers refused to pay. The reinsurance treaty contained a follow the settlement clause but reinsurers argued that they were not bound to pay because (i) part of the settlement related to bad faith claims which reinsurers were not liable to indemnify and (ii) USF&G's allocation was done in such a way as to maximise reinsurers' liability (with USF&G allocating as many losses as possible at the maximum $200,000 effectively to ensure reinsurers paid 50% of the total settlement).

The court ultimately concluded that the reinsurers were bound to follow USF&G's settlements but, importantly, the reinsurers were entitled to challenge some parts of USF&G's allocation of claims as well as the allocation of any element of a bad faith settlement. The matter has been referred back to a trial court to determine the detailed allocation issues.

The New York court's comments on "follow the settlements"

Whilst the New York Appeals Court allowed reinsurers to re-visit certain aspects of the underlying allocation, it made a number of general comments concerning 'follow settlements' clauses:

1. A cedant's allocation and settlement should be approached with deference.

2. Any underlying settlement and allocation of losses must be done in "good faith" and must be objectively reasonable, and it was for a reinsurer to prove this was not the case.

3. A cedant was entitled to present losses in a way that maximised the reinsurance coverage available.

Although a cedant's allocation decision should be treated with "deference", this did not mean that a cedant would be immune from scrutiny. A reinsurer would be bound only by a cedant's "good faith" decision. The court explained that the standard for determining the validity of an allocation of underlying losses should be that of "objective reasonableness". As such, a cedant's allocation must be one that the parties to the underlying insurance claims might reasonably have arrived at in arm's length negotiations as if the reinsurance had not existed. The burden is on reinsurers to prove the contrary and if they cannot, the allocation will be reasonable.

The court stated that, "There seems to be no good alternative to giving a measure of deference to a cedant's allocation decisions. To review each decision de novo would invite long litigation over complex issues that courts may not be well equipped to resolve, creating cost and uncertainty and making the reinsurance market less efficient".

The court also clarified that "reasonableness" does not imply a disregard of a cedant's own interests. The court stated that insurers are not the fiduciaries of their reinsurers and should not be required to put the interests of their reinsurers ahead of their own. As the court summed up, "We think it unrealistic to expect that the cedent will not be guided by its own interests in making the choice."

Is this the same as in England?

The position on follow the settlements clauses in English law is long established. Subject to the specific wording at issue, the reinsurer is generally required to follow any settlement so long as:

1. The reinsured has acted honestly and taken all proper and business-like steps in reaching the settlement.

2. The claim so recognised by the reinsured falls within the risks covered by the reinsurance as a matter of law.

This again is a high standard for reinsurers to discharge as, for example, cedants are not required to show that, as a matter of law, the claim falls within the risks covered by the underlying insurance contract. This automatically precludes reinsurers from re-litigating the question.

Recent English decisions have focussed on the question of proof, much like in the USF&G US case. In Equitas Ltd v R&Q Reinsurance Co (UK) Ltd,2 the court determined what evidence was required for a cedant to "prove" his loss. There, the English High Court allowed the use of an actuarial model to prove the amount of the cedant's underlying settlements. Despite commenting that the actuarial model employed by Equitas was "complex, expensive [and] imperfect", Mr Justice Gross ruled that Equitas was entitled to recover its losses based on the modelling. In IRB Brasil Resseguros SA v CX Reinsurance Co Ltd,3 on an appeal from an arbitration award, the English High Court again outlined what was required under a 'double proviso' follow settlements clause. The standard of proof required for an insured to prove his case is "on the balance of probabilities". In considering the question of proof of loss under such a clause, it was held that the correct approach is to look at the facts on the basis of the claim as settled (as opposed to looking at the underlying facts of the original claim).


It seems that both the English and the US courts are aware that follow the settlements clauses must balance the conflicting interests of the reinsured and the reinsurer. Both jurisdictions, however, seem to have concluded that limiting a reinsurer's ability to re-start litigation is important to ensure the efficiency and well-being of the insurance market. A cedant may be given a head start but must still ensure it settles reasonably and in good faith, otherwise the settlements will be open to challenge.


1. 2013 WL 451666 (N.Y.)

2.[2010] Lloyd's Rep IR 600

3.[2010] Lloyd's Rep 560

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.