Courts Upholds $28 Million Award in Grand Canyon Skywalk Case

A federal court dealt a blow to the business arm of a northern Arizona tribe that owns the Grand Canyon Skywalk by upholding a $28.5 million judgment in favor of a Las Vegas developer who invested the money to build the horseshoe-shaped glass bridge on tribal land.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge David Campbell rejected arguments by the Hualapai Tribe that the award isn’t enforceable, calling one of the arguments “nonsensical” and another “odd.” The American Arbitration Association had determined David Jin is owed the money, mostly for management fees that he was to receive under a 2003 contract with the tribe.

Mark Tratos, an attorney for Jin, said Monday the ruling shows U.S. citizens have recourse in contract disputes with American Indian tribes.
“Their idea is, ‘We can do what we want to anyone we want, anytime we want because we’re a sovereign,”’ Tratos said.
The judgment applies to the Hualapai Tribe’s business arm, Sa’ Nyu Wa Inc., which had argued the arbitration association lacked jurisdiction and declined to participate in the final arbitration hearing. The tribe said proceeding with arbitration was unnecessary because it had already enforced eminent domain over the contract, taking sole control of the Skywalk.
Campbell said Sa’ Nyu Wa could not take away the right of Jin’s company to arbitrate its claims, and that the corporation failed to identify what public good would be served by doing so.
A spokesman for the tribe, Dave Cieslak, said Sa’ Nyu Wa is reviewing its options.
The Skywalk has been a popular tourist attraction for the Hualapai Tribe, giving some 300,000 visitors a year a view of the Colorado River 4,000 feet below. Jin invested $30 million to build the bridge that lies just west of Grand Canyon National Park, but he and the tribe have disagreed on management fees and an incomplete visitors’ center.
The arbitrator found Sa’ Nyu Wa and the tribe failed to keep adequate financial records or make those records available for Jin’s company to audit. The arbitrator also found the corporation and tribe failed to pay management fees and the Skywalk operation’s business expenses, which constituted a breach of contract.
The tribe has said it took over the contract last year because Jin never completed a visitors’ center that people must pass through to access the Skywalk and did not finance the utilities. Cieslak said the tribe would pay Jin the fair market value for the Skywalk to “protect the rights of the tribe and end this painful dispute.”
Sa’ Nyu Wa had asked Campbell to reject the arbitration award by arguing that the tribe’s 2003 agreement with Jin didn’t allow for financial damages. The corporation also argued tribal members never voted to waive liabilities in excess of $250,000, and said the arbitrator exceeded his powers because only a federal court could order arbitration.
Campbell said the agreement makes no mention of a $250,000 limit and allows arbitration for any controversy, claim or dispute when either party sends such a notice to the other. Campbell found that Sa’ Nyu Wa clearly waived it sovereign immunity with respect to financial damages awarded in arbitration that could be enforced in federal court.
“No other reading of the agreement is plausible,” the judge said.
Tratos said it’s doubtful Jin will receive the $28.5 million in a lump sum but suggested the award could be fulfilled by having the proceeds of ticket sales at the Skywalk directed to Jin by a court order.
Jin also is challenging the jurisdiction of the Hualapai court in a related case that went before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year. The Hualapai court in Peach Springs is overseeing the eminent domain case.

Read More

Zurich Posts $ 3.9 Billion Net Income, Farmers GWP up 24% to $4.4 Billion

The Zurich Insurance Group reported a business operating profit (BOP) of $4.1 billion and net income attributable to shareholders (NIAS) of $3.9 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012.
Zurich’s report gave the following highlights for 2012:

– NIAS* of $3.9 billion, up 3 percent compared with 2011, Q4 NIAS of $983 million, up 82 percent compared with prior year
– BOP* of $4.1 billion, down 4 percent compared with 2011, Q4 BOP of $569 million, down 42 percent compared with prior year
– Combined ratio of 98.4 percent, compared with 98.9 percent in 2011
– BOPAT ROE 9.3 percent, down from 10.2 percent in 2011; NIAS ROE of 11.8 percent comparable to last year
– Pricing and portfolio management discipline generate strong underlying profitability
– Accelerating top-line growth in target markets
– Excellent investment performance delivering 7 percent total return
– Strong capital base and cash flows support a sustainable and attractive dividend proposal of CHF 17 [$18.40]
*Zurich noted that some prior periods, as indicated, “have been restated. The ending 2012 shareholders’ equity is unaffected by the restatement. Due to the restatement, third quarter 2012 BOP and NIAS were higher by $264 million and $194 million respectively.”
“We delivered a solid performance in 2012, a year characterized by ongoing economic challenges. Our dividend proposal is again very attractive and reflects our confidence in the success of Zurich’s business strategy as well as the Group’s strong cash generation and capital base,” said CEO Martin Senn.
“The integration of our acquired insurance businesses in Latin America and Malaysia is progressing well and contributing meaningfully to growth as evidenced in the strong contribution to profitability from these areas. In addition, during 2012, we expanded our bank distribution agreements through alliances in the Middle East, Italy, Spain and Indonesia.”
“We continue to execute our proven strategy, growing our business in emerging markets while delivering a resilient performance in mature markets. This strong underlying profitability ensures we remain well positioned to continue to deliver for our customers, employees and shareholders in 2013,” he concluded.”
The earnings report also noted that the Group ”remains focused on delivering its targets. The underlying loss ratio for General Insurance continued to improve in 2012 and was 61.4 percent at year end. The business segment showed a strong underlying performance, which was adversely impacted by weather-related events, a continued decline in investment income as well as decreases in favorable development on reserves established in the prior years and by the previously announced financial adjustments in Germany.”
Zurich said its global life business “maintained profitability levels while continuing to show growth in gross written premiums, policy fees and insurance deposits. The business segment strategy of diversifying geographically into target markets and diversifying product mix into protection and fee-based offerings is offsetting the volume and margin pressures in Europe.
“Farmers showed an increase in BOP of 5 percent in the management services company, while the second consecutive year of significant weather-related events and the absence of favorable prior year loss development compared with 2011 led to losses from reinsurance operations.”
The section of the report, which detailed Farmers operations in 2012, noted that its “business operating profit decreased by $72 million to $1.4 billion or by 5 percent, primarily due to a net underwriting loss incurred by Farmers Re.”
Farmers Management Services business operating profit, however, “increased by $71 million to $1.4 billion or by 5 percent, primarily driven by the increase in gross earned premiums in the Farmers Exchanges, which are managed but not owned by Farmers Group, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Group. Farmers Re business operating profit deteriorated by $142 million to a loss of $26 million, mainly reflecting the absence of favorable development of reserves established in prior years, which benefited Farmers Re during 2011.”
Zurich added that its Farmers Management Services management fees and other related revenues” increased by $79 million to $2.8 billion or by 3 percent, which was driven by the 3 percent increase in gross earned premiums in the Farmers Exchanges.
“The 24 percent increase to $4.4 billion in gross written premiums of Farmers Re was mainly a result of changes in the All Lines quota share reinsurance agreement, as well as the 3 percent gross written premiums growth in the Farmers Exchanges. These changes were an increase in the Farmers Re participation in the Farmers Exchanges business to 20 percent effective December 31, 2011 from 12 percent throughout 2011 and a decrease in the All Lines participation to 18.5 percent effective December 31, 2012, subject to regulatory approval.”
The report added that “non-core businesses recorded an increased business operating profit of $128 million resulting from an increased profit from other run-off businesses.
“Total return on Group investments, which includes investment income, net capital gains and losses and impairments as well as changes in net unrealized gains and losses reported in shareholders’ equity, was 7 percent, an increase of 1.7 percentage points compared with 2011. This excellent investment performance was achieved through a disciplined approach to investing relative to liabilities underpinned by prudent risk management.
“The Group preserved an excellent capital position with shareholders’ equity increasing by $3 billion to $34.5 billion.
Source: Zurich Insurance

Read More

Aon Benfield’s 2012 Cat Review Finds 36% Rise in Insured Losses at $133 Billion

Impact Forecasting, the catastrophe model development center of excellence at Aon Benfield, has published its Annual Global Climate and Catastrophe Report along with the establishment of a new website, Catastrophe Insight, which, it noted, “provides 10 years of catastrophe data, including economic and insured losses across nine key natural perils. It covers the “tiop 10″ cat losses for the years 2005 to 2012.
The Annual Global Climate and Catastrophe Report reveals that 295 natural peril events occurred worldwide in 2012, compared to 257 in 2011. Together they caused total economic losses of $200 billion, only slightly above the 10-year average of $187 billion.

The report notes that, “while economic losses were close to average, insured losses in 2012 were 36 percent higher the ten year average at $72 billion (vs. $53 billion), because the two most costly events of the year occurred in the U.S. which has higher than average insurance penetration. 2012 insured losses were significantly lower than the record 2011 insured loss of $133 billion.” The report also points out that U.S. natural disasters account for more than half of 2012 global economic losses.
Stephen Mildenhall, CEO of Aon Benfield Analytics, stated: “Despite growing support for ‘the new normal’ theory of a world dominated by rapidly escalating global catastrophe losses, our study highlights that 2012 returned to a more normal level of losses after the extreme economic and insured losses of 2011.
“While nominal catastrophe losses are increasing at an alarming rate, economic losses as a percent of global GDP – a measure appropriately normalized for inflation and economic development – has remained relatively stable over the past 30 years. The moderate level of catastrophe losses for 2012 is reflected in strong growth in reinsurer capital during the year.”
Two U.S. natural peril events, Hurricane Sandy and a year-long drought, accounted for two-thirds of all 2012 insurance losses globally and nearly half of all economic losses for the year.
Hurricane Sandy was the costliest single event of the year, to date causing an estimated $28.2 billion in insured losses across private insurers and government-sponsored programs, and approximately $65 billion in economic losses across the United States, the Caribbean, the Bahamas, and Canada.
The most deadly event of 2012 was Super Typhoon Bopha, which killed more than 1,900 people after making landfall in the Philippines.
A total of 14 tropical cyclones made landfall globally in 2012, compared to a long term average of 16. Major flooding affected China and the United Kingdom, with other floods recorded elsewhere in Asia, Europe and Oceania.
Two earthquakes struck Italy causing considerable damage in the Emilia-Romagna region.
In 2012, Europe, Asia and North America (outside the U.S.) all sustained aggregate insured losses above USD1 billion due to flooding, earthquakes and tropical cyclones. Losses in Asia and Oceania were well below their recent 10-year averages, and Europe was slightly below its average.
Steve Bowen, Senior Scientist and Meteorologist at Impact Forecasting, pointed out: “After a year in which Asia and Oceania sustained significant natural disaster losses, the focus shifted back to the United States in 2012. The country was hit by nine separate billion-dollar insured loss events, including Hurricane Sandy and the most extensive drought since the 1930s.
“Tornado activity was dramatically lower than 2011, which can partially be attributed to the drought. U.S. severe weather losses were close to the recent five year average and 46 percent less than the record losses seen in 2011. Finally, 2012 marked the seventh consecutive year that no major hurricane made landfall in the U.S*, a streak not seen since the 1860s.”
Records show that 2012 ended as the eighth warmest year in world history since global land and ocean temperature records began in 1880.
Source: Aon Benfield
*IJ Ed. note: The report is a bit condusing on this. Perhaps Sandy wasn’t technically still a hurricane when it came ashore on the U.S. mainland, but it sure acted like one.

Read More

Casualty insurance, stupid people

Read More

Reasons to hire Product Liability Lawyer

Dangerous or defective product injure thousands of individuals each year. Tragically, many folks even die due to faulty shopper or industrial product. A product liability professional person will facilitate these victims file an efficient suit to assist get the compensation they have and be.

A word of warning: these lawsuits are often troublesome to win. The burden of providing proof is on the litigator, thus because the victim you'll ought to have sturdy proof that the defective product caused your injury. firms generally defend themselves vehemently against these lawsuits to guard the name of their whole. you'll expect the business and its insurance firm to fight your claim tooth and nail with delay ways and legal maneuvers, in hopes that you just can eventually drop your case.

So why pay the time, expense associate degreed aggravation of hiring an attorney? Here square measure 3 wonderful reasons which will create winning your product liability suit well worthwhile within the long-term.

Get cash for Your Recovery

The effects of a dangerous product may cause you to may suffer financially and physically; you will incur high medical prices for doctors, rehabilitation, prescribed drugs, medical instrumentality, and alternative styles of care. you will even be briefly or for good disabled, leading to a loss of wage. If the defective product caused your injury or sickness, a product liability professional person will file a suit to form the corporate pay all of your medical expenses and reimburse you for your lost wages. These specialists may get you compensation for the pain and suffering caused by your injury. This cash can assist you get the most effective medical aid in order that you'll recover as absolutely as attainable from the incident.

Hold the Business chargeable for Its Wrongdoing

Businesses UN agency sell product to the overall public or to alternative firms have a legal and responsibility to confirm that those product square measure safe to use. after they fail during this duty and distribute a defective product, customers will get hurt, or worse, killed.

Filing a product liability suit is an efficient thanks to hold the corporate chargeable for its negligence. several firms that manufacture dangerous product do thus, as a result of they were cutting corners on analysis, testing, materials or correct documentation so as to extend their profit margins. These devil-may-care firms cause injuries associate degreed hurt to several people; filing a suit for product liability with an professional professional person will penalize the corporate and insure that they're control chargeable for their negligence.

Do Your half to guard the general public

You not solely facilitate yourself once you file a product liability suit, you furthermore may facilitate keep the overall public safer. Lawsuits show to the defective product, that results in an organization recall to get rid of it from the marketplace thus others do not suffer a similar fate as you. Lawsuits inspire the devil-may-care company to enhance its safety standards, therefore manufacturing a warning for alternative firms to try to to a similar.

Read More

Product Liability

Product liability cases can come in in many different types. for example, due to negligence, you'll see yourself or maybe an individual in your family seriously injured as the consequence of something from malfunctioning  toys and games throughout to contaminated food to malfunctioning  autos. while not reference to any root grounds for a particular merchandise liability claim, you'll be entitled to in depth compensation for those injuries that you simply have received and on several occasions, for any losses that you are going to encounter within the future among them lost wage, medical-related charges and therefore the like.

Product liability cases square measure extraordinarily tough and ought to have a superior quantity of experience. The difficulties of those sorts of cases want several levels of defendants, professional witnesses requiring a substantial investment of your time and in addition finances, associate understanding of the way to take care of the particular discovery technique in unknown states or countries, and knowing that legal courts have gotten jurisdiction on the topic.

For anybody UN agency is hurt caused by a malfunctioning  product, the liability for this type of injuries is often traceable either to manufacturer, the distributor, the distributer and / or the distributer of those sorts of product.

Defective merchandise Law is categorised underneath personal injury/tort law and is directly related to judicial proceeding law. It identifies a claim against all parties on the cycle of manufacture (designers, makers, distributors and retailers) of merchandise that contain defects that damage individuals leading to personal injury or loss.

Product liability cases square measure specialised cases that require information of product liability law and conjointly professional witnesses UN agency have precise experience within the product involved.

Liability claims is also filed by either the buyer of the merchandise, or even by anyone to UN agency this product had been loaned or given. while there's completely no federal product liability law, nearly all state governments presently have product liability laws.

Typically the claims sometimes associated with Product Liability within the USA square measure negligence, strict liability, breach of warrantee, and shopper protection claims. A model of liability known as "stream of commerce" functions in most states, that means if your firm participates in inserting the merchandise into the "stream of commerce," it might instantly be command answerable for potential damages to the tip user.

A key concern in any liability proceedings is whether or not or not the merchandise incorporates a defect, that's positively associate imperfectness that renders a product venturesome for its selected use. style flaws exist whenever a overall style of merchandise may well be improperly designed to the extent on create unreasonable danger to shoppers.

In the construct of "strict liability," a proceedings may well be registered while not the requirement to ascertain negligence or perhaps fault if associate injury is that the results of a harmful product. This approach makes it more easy for any cut shopper to require action at law against either the merchandise manufacturer or the search wherever the merchandise had been bought. each state and conjointly federal laws have an effect on product liability cases, creating it puzzling occasionally to understand absolutely the right place to file a proceedings. this can be particularly valid ought to a manufacturer operates in numerous states.

Read More