California Court Rules that Insurers’ Consent Required to Transfer Coverage for Pre-Close Liability Claims
- Topics:
- Investment Strategy
- Tags:
- Business Operations,
- Claim,
- Corporate Insurance,
- Insurance,
- Insurance Company,
- PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting
- Source:
- PricewaterhouseCoopers
FREE Registration is required
Overview: The white paper asserts that in a 6-1 decision, the California Supreme Court ruled that insurer consent is necessary before liability insurance benefits can be assigned to a successor corporation in a merger or acquisition. These benefits include defense and indemnification for claims arising before the transaction date, and covered under comprehensive general liability and excess liability umbrella policies that insure both the seller and the units being sold. The February 3, 2003 ruling in Henkel vs. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. et al. will be closely watched by insurers facing mass tort claims, and could affect the scope of buy side due diligence along with the structure of purchase and sale agreements.
(Is this item miscategorized? Does it need more tags? Let us know.)
Format: PDF | Size: 189KB | Date: Apr 2003 | Pages: 2
