Cede Agreement

The reinsurance sold refers to the part of the risk that a general insurer will hand over to a reinsurer. It allows the non-insurer to reduce its exposure to an insurance policy it has taken out by transferring that risk to another company. Direct insurers are also referred to as a divested business, while the reinsurance company is also referred to as a reinsurance business. In return for risk management, the reinsurance company receives a premium and pays the debt for the risk taken into account. Cede is often a formal term used in the debate on territory and rights, but it is also used in a less formal way. For example, Spain ceded Puerto Rico to the United States in 1898 after the Spanish-American War, and the United States transferred control of the Panama Canal to Panama in 1999. Critics warn that we are abandoning leadership in alternative energy technology to China. Citizens of either European country are still concerned that their own country will cede too much power to the European Union. A tennis player has no choice if she hands over her No. 1 ranking to a rival. The territory can also be sold for payment, z.B. in Louisiana Purchase and Alaska Purchase.

The verdict contains important lessons for the parties and their lawyers who depend on the assignment for security. A claim that must be surrendered must be an existing claim. The debt that leads to the debt is paid. Therefore, if a debt is to be transferred, it is important to ensure that the debt is not repaid before the debt is transferred. In insurance matters, retrocession agreements are generally subject to a reinsurance or retrocession agreement, and reinsurance principles also apply to protection against handover. However, the SCA found that at the time the bank abandoned the debt, nothing could be divested, as GD Brews had to pay the debts in accordance with its agreement with Brayton and JP Brews. From a legal point of view, the transfer by transfer of a non-existent right is a nullity. The SCA also reviewed the authorized correspondence between the bank`s lawyers and the lawyers for LA DG Brews. It concluded that the parties clearly intended to transfer its full payment request to the bank. GD Brews attempted to amend its claim by stating that the assignment was a precondition for payment, but the Tribunal in particular dismissed this attempt as inconsistent with the assignment.

The transfer taker in this type of assignment is not required to inform the debtors of the transferor. The transfer director only holds this assignment as collateral, the cleared accounting debts are constantly replaced by new ones. In Grobbelaar/Oosthuizen 2009 (5) SA 500 (SCA), the Tribunal found that in the event of a transfer of rights, the assignor would lose all rights by issuing these rights to an assignee and, after the transfer, nothing would remain in the transferor (see item 8). This decision was supported by Kritzinger and Another/Standard Bank of South Africa (3034/2013) [2013] ZAFFHS 215 (September 19, 2013) (Kritzinger case).

Posted in Uncategorized