A Reprint from MEALEY’S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Vol. 21, #13 February 6, 2007
Commentary
By Peter H. Bickford
[Editor’s Note: Peter H. Bickford is an independent counselor and arbitrator to the insurance and reinsurance markets, with particular focus on dispute resolution, solvency, regulatory, agency and operational issues. In addition to being a practicing attorney for over 30 years, he has been an officer of both a life insurance company and of a broker oriented property/casualty insurance and reinsurance facility with line responsibility for contract and claims operations. He is an ARIASUS. certified arbitrator and umpire.
Copyright 2007 by the author. Response articles to this commentary are welcome.]
Arbitration has been a recognized standard for resolving disputes in the insurance industry for centuries, evolving from the need for global commerce to be able to rely on standard business practices and the prompt resolution of disputes.1 Over the past several decades, arbitration has become the preferred means of resolving disputes between insurers and their reinsurers. In this period the number of full-time reinsurance arbitrators, along with the number of law firms, consultants, and other experts specializing in this field, has skyrocketed.2 The arbitration boom has also begun to take hold in other areas as well, such as between insurers and commercial insureds and between insurance companies and their agents, with many insurers now including an arbitration clause in their standard producer or agency agreements. However, this expansion of the arbitration process beyond the reinsurance arena has its critics, and creates special problems for agencies that need to be considered. In his excellent article on the commercial history of arbitration and insurance,3 Continue Reading →