Final Joint Pretrial Order - Reinsurance Focus

29. ReliaStar relied upon Aon Re and Smith to disclose material
information and to act to protect its interests.
30. It was reasonable and appropriate for ReliaStar to rely on
defendants to protect ReliaStar’s interests and to disclose material
information.
31. ReliaStar relied upon Unicover and Pallat to disclose material
information and to act to protect its interests.
32. It was reasonable and appropriate for ReliaStar to rely on Unicover
and Pallat to protect ReliaStar’s interests and to disclose material
information.
33. Had defendants or Unicover and Pallat disclosed the relevant
information to ReliaStar, ReliaStar would have taken steps to stop
Unicover from writing more business on its behalf.
34. Had Unicover and Pallat not made misrepresentations to ReliaStar,
ReliaStar would have taken steps to stop Unicover from writing
more business on its behalf.
35. The increase in volume of business placed under the Whole
Account in late 1998 and early 1999, despite the protests of the
retrocessionaires, was a substantial factor in the loss of
retrocessional coverage.
36. The loss of retrocessional coverage was a foreseeable result of the
increasing volume of business being ceded under the Whole
Account.
37. ReliaStar was damaged by the loss of retrocessional coverage
under the Whole Account.
B. Legal Contentions
See the parties’ alternative proposed instructions and stated objections contained
in the attached Proposed Joint Jury Instructions and the Motions in Limine identified
below. Without limitation to the issues in dispute reflected therein, plaintiff identifies the
following Legal Contentions as likely to be in dispute:
-7-