By Michael Katz and James Young. Published by Claims Magazine. Insurers and reinsurers who believe that the current system of reinsurance arbitration represents a more efficient way of resolving reinsurance claims find themselves at a disadvantage because of inequities and ambiguities in the U.S. system. As a result, many questions are arising about the current practices in arbitration when instead there should be a greater emphasis on neutral, impartial arbitrators and more meaningful documentation of opinions.
The original article was published in the November 2006 issue of Claims Magazine. A copy of the article can be accessed through this link: Rethinking Arbitration.