UK: Reinsurance: Notification Of Loss/Claims Co-Operation Clauses

Last Updated: 13 March 2007
Article by Stephen Netherway and Neil Beighton

The Commercial Court has reiterated that "loss" in a notification clause means actual loss to the reinsured.

In a number of recent decisions the courts have considered issues relating to claims provisions in reinsurance contracts. In AIG v Faraday the court held:

  • No loss was suffered by the reinsured unless an actual loss was a "proven fact".
  • "Potential loss" is a difficult concept and certainty was needed in view of the "draconian consequences" of breach of a condition precedent.
  • "Loss" is an essentially different term from "alleged", "claimed" or "potential" loss.

The decision marks a further move away from the decision in Lumberman’s v Bovis – to see our Law Now please click here. It is also a further demonstration of the courts’ tendency to construe claims notification and co-operation clauses narrowly – especially where the clause is a condition precedent to the reinsurers’ liability.

For more information about the case see below:

To view the article in full, please see below:

Full Article

The Commercial Court has reiterated that "loss" in a notification clause means actual loss to the reinsured.

In a number of recent decisions the courts have considered issues relating to claims provisions in reinsurance contracts. In AIG v Faraday the court held:

  • No loss was suffered by the reinsured unless an actual loss was a "proven fact".
  • "Potential loss" is a difficult concept and certainty was needed in view of the "draconian consequences" of breach of a condition precedent.
  • "Loss" is an essentially different term from "alleged", "claimed" or "potential" loss.

The decision marks a further move away from the decision in Lumberman’s v Bovis – to see our Law Now please click here. It is also a further demonstration of the courts’ tendency to construe claims notification and co-operation clauses narrowly – especially where the clause is a condition precedent to the reinsurers’ liability.

Further reading: AIG Europe (Ireland) Limited v Faraday Capital Limited [2006] EWHC 2707.

For information on the Commercial Court’s recent decision on follow the settlements clauses click here.

In more detail...

In the recent reinsurance case of AIG Europe (Ireland) Ltd v Faraday Capital Ltd the Commercial Court examined the issue of how to construe and interpret common claims cooperation clauses. The decision has important implications for reinsurers seeking to ensure timely notification of losses.

Morison J also commented on the role of extrinsic evidence in the ascertainment of losses and liability. The decision appears to be another nail in the coffin of Colman J’s decision on the extrinsic evidence point in the Lumberman’s case.


AIG Ireland provided D&O cover to Smartforce, an Irish company providing e-learning courses and reference material for the IT industry. Faraday reinsured AIG Ireland. In September 2002 Smartforce merged with Skillsoft. On 19 November 2002 the management of the newly merged enterprise announced that they intended to restate the financial statements of Smartforce for the previous three years. After this announcement Smartforce’s share value fell.

On 25 November 2002 AIG prepared an internal loss notification document which noted the fall in value. Subsequently, the shareholders initiated various class actions in the US against Smartforce and some of its directors.

AIG posted a reserve on 23 February 2004 of US $7.5 million on advice of their counsel in anticipation of a possible settlement. At the beginning of March 2004 the courts ordered mediation and on 2 March 2004 AIG filed an internal Management Alert Memorandum that referred to the possibility of the claim against Smartforce exceeding the limits of their cover. Shortly thereafter AIG filed a mediation statement "AIG recognises that the insureds face significant potential exposure in connection with the underlying law suits". A Memorandum of Understanding was prepared between the parties at the mediation on 23 March 2004 and the class actions were settled for US $30 million on 25 March 2004. AIG notified Faraday of its loss on 19 April 2004 and, having paid Smartforce’s claim under its D & O policy for the full limit, sought recovery under its reinsurance.

The claim was paid by all reinsurers except Faraday.Faraday contended that AIG had breached the notification of loss/claims cooperation clause and as compliance with that clause was a condition precedent to liability Faraday was therefore not liable under the contract. The clause read as follows:

"It is a condition precedent to any liability under this Policy that:

  1. The reinsured shall upon knowledge of any loss or losses which may give rise to a claim advise the reinsurers thereof as soon as is reasonably practicable and in any event within 30 days.
  2. The reinsured shall furnish the reinsurers with all information available respecting such loss or losses and shall co-operate with the reinsurers in the adjustment and settlement thereof."

The Principal issues

Faraday argued that:

  • The losses were notified to them too late;
  • When properly construed the clause obliged AIG to notify Faraday of circumstances that might give rise to a claim against Smartforce as well as the actual losses. Faraday argued that AIG had not done so "as soon as reasonably practicable" or " within 30 days" of AIG’s knowledge of the loss;
  • Even were the clause only to cover actual losses AIG were aware of the losses when the shares fell in value;
  • In any event the losses were not notified "as soon as reasonably practicable" even if they were notified within 30 days;
  • The legal costs of the original shareholders and Smartforce were known " actual losses" and were also not notified in accordance with the claims cooperation clause.

AIG argued in response that it had given proper notice under the claims co-operation clause, because:

  • The clause did not require notification of potential loss but only an actual loss;
  • AIG had not been aware of any "actual loss" until the settlement in March 2004. Neither the notification dated 25 November 2002, the preliminary assessment made on 12 February 2004, nor the reserve posted on 23 February 2004 amounted to a proved loss;
  • Although AIG knew that the shareholders and Smartforce had incurred attorney fees the legal costs were not a loss for the purposes of the claims cooperation clause.


Morison J first examined the claims cooperation/loss notification clause in question and remarked that this was a " standard clause" in common use. He referred to the case of Royal & Sun Alliance Plc v Dornoch (2005) which concerned the interpretation of a similar clause. The Court of Appeal in that case, examining the issue of whether loss had to be "alleged loss" or "actual loss" recognised that although it may be good business common sense to view loss as alleged loss, they would rely on the principle that a party would only be exempted from liability in reliance on a claims cooperation clause if the words of the clause were clear. The Court of Appeal held that a claimant did not suffer loss unless an actual loss was a proven fact.

Morison J, applying those principles to the facts in AIG v Faraday disagreed with Faraday’s submission that "loss" meant "potential or alleged". He further commented;

  • In construing the clause the loss had to be the loss of the shareholders who were the claimants of the US class actions. No loss was suffered unless an actual loss was a "proven fact".
  • There are inherent difficulties in the concept of a "potential loss" - would a mere possibility be enough or would there need to be a likelihood that actual loss would in fact happen? Certainty was required in this situation given the "Draconian consequences" if the clause was not complied with.
  • The words "loss" or "losses" were essentially different from "alleged", "claimed" or "potential" losses.

Morison J held that on the facts of the case there was no loss known to AIG until at the earliest 23 March 2004, the date when the Memorandum of Understanding was agreed following the mediation. At that point a "might be loss" turned into an "actual quantifiable loss" for the purposes of the reinsurance. The fact that AIG had posted a reserve did not establish knowledge of a loss; it was merely a process by which insurance companies anticipated the possibility of a loss on a policy. The notification on 19 April 2004 therefore fell within 30 days of the actual loss arising, and the claims cooperation condition precedent had not been breached.

Morison J also confirmed that expenses incurred by the claimants in providing their claims did not fall within the meaning of the word "loss" in the claims co-operation clause as those costs were not sums which could be adjusted or settled by AIG or Faraday.

Finally, he addressed Faraday’s argument that the claims cooperation clause contained two conditions precedent to be fulfilled to advise "as soon as reasonably practicable" and to advise "within 30 days". He held that if this was the case the clause would be ambiguous and unfair and that if this had been the intention of the parties then it should have been spelled out. In any event in his view the notification was given as soon was reasonably practicable.

Morison J also took the opportunity to comment on Colman J’s decision in Lumberman’s Mutual Casualty v Bovis Lend Lease Limited (2005). In that case, which concerned disputes under a building contract and a subsequent global settlement, Colman J had found that liability to third party must be established or "ascertained" by judgment, award or agreement and that , the Court could only look at the terms of the settlement itself to determine whether liability was ascertained, and on could not consider extrinsic evidence.

This was a controversial finding and in the subsequent case of Enterprise Oil v Strand Insurance Company (2006) Aikens J, although not reaching any different finding on need for ascertainment, disagreed with Colman J on sources of evidence. He observed that Colman J’s findings would "lead to great commercial inconvenience and to artificial statements in judgments, awards and settlement agreements".

In the present case Morison J weighed in on Lumberman’s issue and sided with Aikens J’s position in Enterprise v Strand. He commented that: "I doubt that the decision [in Lumberman’s v Bovis] is right but it cannot, I think, apply to a reinsurance case where there is a follow the settlements clause… the decision is "controversial" and was doubted by Aikens J in Enterprise… In my judgment, Aikens J has correctly identified the flaw in Colman J's reasoning which led him to what is an instinctively surprising conclusion. He rejected the idea that extrinsic evidence could be called to explain the losses and to make the attribution to insured and uninsured items. I do not understand why this is so."


The decision on the loss notification point is a further demonstration of the courts’ tendency to construe claims cooperation clauses - especially those that operate as conditions precedent - fairly narrowly. To have any real bite, reinsurers need to ensure that such clauses are carefully drafted to include notification of potential losses as well as actual losses.

As regards the issue of extrinsic evidence in ascertainment of loss and liability, it should be borne in mind that although two Commercial Court judges have now criticised the Lumberman’s decision, Lumberman’s has not yet been overruled, and the Court of Appeal will need to address the issue before Lumberman’s can be dismissed. Pending a Court of Appeal decision, it is still prudent, where possible, for reinsureds to draft settlements to particularise and identify the basis of each head of liability or, better still, to obtain reinsurers’ agreement before any settlement.

Further reading: AIG Europe (Ireland) Limited v Faraday Capital Limited [2006] EWHC 2707

For information on the Commercial Court’s recent decision on follow the settlements clauses click here.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 12/03/2007.

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.