header_logo
cancel1

Chile

Published on Wednesday 25th October 2017

    Regulation

    • Chile

      The main regulations governing the insurance and reinsurance industry are to be found in Title VIII, Book II of the Chilean Code of Commerce, the Insurance Companies Act (DFL 251) and the Supreme Decree 1055.

      The Code of Commerce, between articles 512 and 601, sets out the general rules applicable to all non-marine insurance, including specific regulation for life insurance, civil liability insurance and reinsurance, among others. In turn, articles 1158 to 1202 regulate marine insurance.

      DFL 251 establishes the rules applicable to the commercialisation of insurance and reinsurance in Chile, additionally setting out the financial and corporate requirements for insurance and reinsurance companies to operate in Chile.

      Supreme Decree 1055 regulates the activities of brokers and loss adjusters in more detail, establishing the procedure that should be followed by companies or loss adjusters when adjusting a loss.

      The local regulator, the Superintendency of Securities and Insurances (SVS), has been granted powers to issue specific regulations and guidance in order to implement the principles and rules contained in the codes and statutes mentioned above.

      While widely used as guidance and quoted by arbitrators and courts in their awards and final decisions, case law is not binding but merely persuasive. 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      The SVS is the regulatory body for the local insurance and reinsurance industry. It not only authorises the operation of insurance and reinsurance companies, insurance brokers and loss adjusters, but also supervises them, ensuring they are observant of laws and regulations.

      In this regard, the SVS is entitled to impose fines, sanction and eventually revoke the licence to operate in the event of a serious breach. 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Pursuant to article 4 of the Insurance Companies Act, risks located in Chile can only be insured by insurance or reinsurance companies incorporated under Chilean law and authorised to operate by the SVS. Exempt from this restriction are foreign companies covering international shipping, international civil aviation and international carriage of goods and satellites, and the cargo they carry.

      However, residents in Chile, including companies domiciled in Chile, are free to insure their risks abroad, with a few exceptions. Nonetheless, premiums paid for insurance purchased abroad will be subject to additional taxes.

      Fronting is therefore necessary to write insurance of risks located in Chile. 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      According to article 16 of the Insurance Companies Act, reinsurance of insurance contracts entered into in Chile can be carried out by locally incorporated insurance or reinsurance companies, or by foreign reinsurance companies.

      For foreign reinsurance companies to write reinsurance in Chile, they must complete a registration process with the SVS, during which they shall provide the SVS with a credit risk rating of at least BBB or its equivalent issued by a reputed credit rating agency, and they must appoint a representative in Chile with faculties to be served upon him or her in legal proceedings. However, there will be no need to appoint  said representative if the reinsurance is conducted through a reinsurance broker registered with the SVS; the broker will be deemed the legal representative of the foreign reinsurer.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Classification of terms

    • Chile

      Under Chilean law, there is no concept of ‘condition precedent’ as it is understood under English law. However, according to general rules contained in the Chilean Civil Code, applicable to insurance and reinsurance contracts in the absence of specific regulation, every bilateral contract includes a tacit condition, according to which, any breach of a term or a condition of a contract governed by Chilean law may allow the diligent party to request before a court the fulfilment of the contract’s obligations or its termination, and in both cases claim damages.

      However, in practice, such an extreme solution is not common in the case of insurance and reinsurance contracts. Usually, the breach of a term or condition of the insurance or reinsurance contract does not allow the insurer or the reinsurer to avoid or terminate the policy; the effects of such a breach will depend on the wording of the relevant provision.

      The same can be said about warranties; whether an insurer or a reinsurer can avoid or terminate a policy based on a breach of a warranty will depend on the drafting of the warranty itself. 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Duty of good faith, non-disclosure and misrepresentation

    • Chile

      Under Chilean law the concept of the "duty of utmost good faith" is recognised as a key principle of insurance law and, while it is accepted that both parties to an insurance or reinsurance contract shall observe this principle, rules contained in the Code of Commerce refer expressly to the duty of utmost good faith that shall be observed by the insured.

      Pursuant to article 524 No. 1 of the Code of Commerce, the insured is obliged to honestly answer all the questions made by the insurer to identify the insurance subject matter and assess the extension of the risk. The same rules shall apply by analogy to reinsurance contracts.

      In practical terms, the insured has not breached his or her duty if he or she fails to disclose a circumstance that was not asked about by the insurer at the time of entering into the insurance or reinsurance contract.

      The duty of utmost good faith should also be observed by the insurer during negotiation and during the validity of the policy.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      According to article 525 of the Code of Commerce, the remedies available to the insurer depend on whether a loss has or has not occurred.

      If, before a loss has occurred, it is discovered that the insured has failed to disclose a circumstance asked by the insurer, or his or her declarations are inexact, or he or she makes an inexcusable mistake when answering a question to identify the risk, then the insurer is entitled to rescind the policy.

      Conversely, if the breach does not amount to any of these circumstances (failure to disclose circumstances questioned by the insurer, inexact declarations or inexcusable mistakes), the insurer can propose an amendment to the terms and conditions of the insurance in order to adjust the premium and conditions to reflect the real risk. If the insured does not agree with the amendments proposed by the insurer or does not provide an answer within 10 days, then the insurer is entitled to rescind the policy.

      If a breach of the obligation to answer all the questions honestly comes to light after a loss has occurred, then the insurer is exempted from paying an indemnity had he or she been entitled to cancel the policy, as explained above. If the insurer is not entitled to cancel the policy, the indemnity can be reduced.

      If the insurer breaches his or her duty of utmost good faith, then the insured is entitled to damages.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      The duty of utmost good faith remains during the operation of the policy and it shall be observed especially in the event of a loss or in the event of a change in the circumstances of the risk insured.

      If utmost good faith is not observed in the event of a loss, the insured is entitled to reject the claim and, eventually, it may give rise to a criminal offence.

      If there is a change in the circumstances of the risk and utmost good faith is not observed by the insured when declaring the change, the insurer may be entitled to cancel the policy if this failure to declare the change entitles him to rescind the policy in accordance with the rules contained in article 525 (see question 7). 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Reinsurance issues

    • Chile

      With a few exceptions, a reinsurance contract is governed by the principle of contractual freedom, according to which, parties to a contract are free to choose the terms and conditions they think serve their interests better.

      In this context, these clauses are usually incorporated by parties in their reinsurance contracts and normally they will adopt the wordings that are commonly used by the international markets, mainly the London market, and therefore its effects will be those usually attributed to these clauses.

      Historically, it was only the follow-the-settlement and follow-the-fortunes clauses that were considered to be implied in a reinsurance contract. However, current practice is to include express wording for each of these clauses and not to rely on previous practice.

      If tested before a court, these clauses should be upheld and binding upon the parties, provided their meaning and effects can be clearly established.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Claim process

    • Chile

      Pursuant to article 531 of the Code of Commerce, a loss is deemed to have occurred by a cause covered under the policy. Therefore, the insured is only obliged to prove the occurrence of a loss and its circumstances. Then it will be for the insurer to prove that an exclusion applies.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      According to article 524 No. 7 of the Code of Commerce, the insured is obliged to notify the insurer as soon as he or she learns of any circumstances that may give rise to a claim under the policy.

      However, if the insurance contract is not subject to the mandatory rules included in the Code of Commerce, parties are free to agree the time frame within which a loss, or the circumstances that may give rise to a loss, shall be notified.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      While the burden of notifying a loss, or the circumstance that may give rise to a loss, falls on the insured, he or she may mandate the broker to notify the insurer, in which case the broker is subject to the same time limit applicable to the insured.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Whether the loss is adjusted by the insurer directly or by a loss adjuster, the insurer is under no obligation to confirm or deny coverage at any time, until the end of the adjustment process.

      The insurer or the loss adjuster, accordingly, shall issue a final adjustment report confirming or denying coverage within 45 days of the denouncement of the loss.

      Exceptionally, marine hull and general average losses shall be adjusted within 180 days and general insurance losses (ie, excluding life and health insurance) with an annual premium above 100 Unidades de Fomento (UF), shall be adjusted within 90 days. The UF is a unity of indexation whose value varies daily in accordance with the inflation rate of the previous month. On 1 October 2017, 1 UF amounted to 26,658.56 Chilean pesos. All these deadlines can be extended for equal periods under certain circumstances.

      Coverage and payment of a loss will usually be resolved in the final adjustment report. Nonetheless, if the adjustment is carried out by a loss adjuster, an interim adjustment report may be issued to resolve the differences that may arise between the parties during the adjustment process, including coverage and causation issues.

      If the adjustment of a loss is made by a loss adjuster, the insurer and the insured have five working days to make comments to an interim adjustment report and 10 days to challenge the final adjustment report. The insured shall have 20 days to challenge the final adjustment report issued in connection with a claim under a property or casualty policy taken individually, where the insured and beneficiary are legal entities and the annual premium is more than 200 UF. Likewise, the insured shall have 20 days to challenge the final adjustment report in the case of insurance for hull and carriage of goods by sea or air.

      In turn, loss adjusters will have 6 or 12 days to answer the challenge of a final adjustment report, depending on the number of days given to the insured to challenge a final adjustment report. If, five days after the answers from the loss adjuster are received, differences as to coverage or the amount of the indemnity to be paid persist, the insurer shall communicate its decision on the claim to the insured.

      Should the insurer choose to pay the indemnity proposed in the final adjustment report in full, or its undisputed part, it shall be done within six days of his or her communication to the insurer about his or her decision on the claim.

      It should be noted that interim and final adjustment reports are not binding upon the parties; therefore, insurers are not obliged to pay an indemnity even if the final adjustment report recommends payment. Conversely, if the final adjustment report concludes that the loss is not covered under the terms and conditions of the policy, the insured can file an action under the contract of insurance to obtain payment.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      If losses are not adjusted within the time frames mentioned in question 13, the SVS may issue a warning, apply a fine, suspend the operations and eventually revoke the authorisation granted to the insurance company or the loss adjuster to operate in the insurance market.

      In turn, if payment of a loss is not made within six days or within the period of time agreed by the parties for payment to be made, then damages derived from the default can be claimed.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      With a few exceptions, insurance rules contained in the Code of Commerce are not mandatory for reinsurance contracts; therefore, parties are free to agree to the terms and conditions of their choice, including specific time frames for notifying claims. Also, parties to a reinsurance contract may agree on specific time frames for reinsurers to confirm or deny coverage and for payment of claims.

      However, the practice is that time frames in the reinsurance contract will follow those contained in the insurance contract or the applicable law, especially when it comes to the denouncement of a loss, the issuance of comments on interim reports challenging final adjustment reports and payment of a loss. Reinsurers are not entitled to comment on interim reports or challenge a final adjustment report directly as they are not part of the adjustment process, hence their views will be communicated to the insurers who, in turn, may formally pass them onto loss adjusters.

      This practice is favoured by insurers in order to avoid being exposed to a situation where they have to make a decision as to whether or not to accept a claim and subsequently make a payment, ignoring whether reinsurers will accept or reject a claim or when they will effectively pay a loss.

      In this regard, article 585 of the Code of Commerce, which is one of the few mandatory rules applicable to reinsurance, states that the insurer cannot delay payment of the indemnity on the basis of lack of payment from the reinsurer.      

      If no specific time frames have been agreed between insurers and reinsurers for the denouncement of a loss, or commenting on or challenging an adjustment report, then the rules established in the Code of Commerce and Supreme Decree 1055 will apply to reinsurance contracts.

      Hence, timely communication between insurers and reinsurers during the adjustment process is critical to avoid future disputes as to coverage and payment of an indemnity. Lack of communication may result in an interim report not being observed or a final adjustment report not being challenged in a timely fashion, which, even if not binding upon parties, can carry a lot of weight in the event of litigation.

      The inclusion of a claims cooperation clause or a claims control clause in the reinsurance contract may help to avert some of the problems that may arise during the adjustment process.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      As a matter of law, upon payment of a loss the insurer becomes subrogated in all rights and actions of the insured against third parties, without the need for a separate clause. The subrogation right is exercised in the name of the insurer, who shall provide evidence of the payment and that payment was due under the policy.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Law and jurisdiction and dispute resolution

    • Chile

      The general rule is that insurance contracts entered into in Chile shall use a policy form registered at the SVS. Exempt from this obligation are those policies covering carriage of goods by land, marine and aircraft and those policies where the insured and the beneficiary are legal entities, and the net annual premium is equal or above 200 UF.

      When the use of a registered policy form is not mandatory, parties are free to agree to the terms and conditions of their choice, including a different choice of substantive law. However, it is the practice of the Chilean industry to agree on the application of Chilean law.

      In turn, pursuant to article 29 of the Insurance Companies Act, the jurisdiction of Chilean courts is mandatory for the insurance and reinsurance of Chilean businesses. In practical terms, Chilean law and forum are the general rule for insurance and reinsurance contracts. Nonetheless, if a different forum is chosen by the parties, it is likely that a court or an arbitrator will disregard any choice of forum other than Chilean courts.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      According to article 543 of the Code of Commerce, all disputes arising out of an insurance contract are subject to arbitration. The arbitrator shall be an arbitrator in equity. However, in the event of disputes in connection with a loss estimated to be below 10,000 UF, the insured may choose to submit its claim before an ordinary court.

      If the insurance contract is not subject to the mandatory rules contained in the Code of Commerce, it is the general practice of parties to resort to arbitrators at law to resolve their disputes, and these arbitrations clauses will be recognised and enforced by Chilean courts.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Mediation as a different and independent process to resolve disputes is uncommon in Chile and parties should expressly agree to it.

      However, a mediation stage is usually included within the procedure agreed by the parties to resolve their disputes when heard by an arbitrator, and is mandatory if an action is filed before an ordinary court.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Most insurance and reinsurance disputes are resolved through arbitration, whether by reason of the application of the mandatory rules contained in the Code of Commerce or in accordance with the arbitration clauses usually included within an insurance or reinsurance contract.

      If arbitration is mandatory in accordance with the rules of the Code of Commerce, then the arbitrator shall be an arbitrator in equity, which means that he or she shall resolve the dispute following his or her good judgement and equity principles. If parties cannot agree on the choice of an arbitrator, it will be for the ordinary courts to appoint an arbitrator, who shall be a mixed arbitrator and who will follow the procedural rules agreed by the parties, but his or her award shall be rendered in accordance with the law.

      If a dispute is to be resolved in accordance with an arbitration clause, parties are free to choose the type of arbitrator they prefer. However, they usually choose a mixed arbitrator.

      Whether an arbitrator in equity or a mixed arbitrator resolves the dispute, an award shall be delivered within two years of the appointment of the arbitrator, unless parties have agreed to a shorter time frame for the award to be delivered.

      The distinction between an arbitrator in equity and a mixed arbitrator has a direct bearing on the remedies available against the arbitrator’s award, which in turn has an impact on the time frame before a final and definitive decision is reached.

      An award delivered by a mixed arbitrator can be reviewed by the competent Court of Appeal; it usually takes between six and 12 months to hear the appeal. However, it is common practice for parties to waive the appeal remedy. Also, it is possible to file an appeal on points of law against the award or a disciplinary remedy against the mixed arbitrator. Usually, it takes between six months and a year before the competent Court of Appeal reviews these remedies.

      Eventually, if the parties agreed to an appeal remedy, the decision of the Court of Appeal may be subject to an appeal on points of law before the Supreme Court, that will take up to a year to review this appeal.

      In turn, there is no appeal remedy against the award delivered by an arbitrator in equity, unless parties have agreed that such a remedy can be filed. However, this is not common practice.

      However, an appeal on points of law against the award of an arbitrator in equity or a disciplinary remedy against him or her can be filed. Both remedies shall be filed before the competent Court of Appeals and it usually takes between six months and a year before any of these remedies are reviewed.

      Finally, in those cases where the Code of Commerce allows for the insured to file his or her claim before an ordinary court, the time frame for a final decision ranges from two and a half to three years and another 10 to 14 months if an appeal remedy is filed. In addition, if an appeal on points of law is filed against the decision of the Court of Appeal, six months to a year should be allowed before a decision is made by the Supreme Court.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      No, ordinary courts of justice in Chile are not specialised in hearing insurance and reinsurance disputes. That is one of the reasons why, in 2013, arbitration was introduced into the Code of Commerce as the compulsory means to resolve insurance disputes arising out of insurance contracts subject to the rules of the Code of Commerce, with the exception already mentioned in question 18.

      When parties are free to agree the terms and conditions of their insurance or reinsurance contracts, arbitration is the preferred way to resolve a dispute, since there is a body of knowledgeable arbitrators in the matter of insurance and reinsurance.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Even in those cases where arbitration is not mandatory, parties usually choose to resolve their disputes by means of arbitration.

      Tribunals will be constituted in accordance with the arbitration clause. If the clause is silent as to the number of arbitrators or the type of arbitrator, it will be for the ordinary court to determine how the arbitration tribunal shall be constituted and the type of arbitrator that will resolve the dispute.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Reservation of rights / without prejudice rule

    • Chile

      While there is no specific regulation that deals with the reservation of rights, it is accepted that the insurer is entitled to protect his or her interests through the use of this concept, especially during the adjustment process.

      However, the protection afforded by a reservation of rights under Chilean law is not as strong as it is under other jurisdictions. Therefore, if a relevant issue that may compromise the position of the insurer arises, it is advisable to address it and resolve it as soon as possible, and by doing so avoid any discussion as to a potential waiver of a defence.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      The concept of "without prejudice" will not prevent or exempt a statement or a document from being put before a court as evidence, unless parties have expressly agreed that certain statements or documents are to be treated as confidential and shall not be disclosed before a court.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Cost, interest, monetary correction, moral and punitive damages

    • Chile

      Litigation costs are usually borne by each party. However, while not the general rule, the defeated party may be forced to pay the court’s costs and the counterparty’s litigation costs.

      While court costs are imposed over the loser with some frequency, it is very rare that a party is required to pay for the counterparty’s attorney fees. Only if the court or the arbitrator decides that there was no plausible reason to litigate can a party be forced to pay for the counterparty’s attorney fees. In such case the court or the arbitrator have a discretionary faculty to determine the amount of the costs to be paid by the loser, and his or her assessment will be based on the amount of the dispute, the complexity of the case and the time that it took before a decision was reached or an award delivered.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Arbitrators or ordinary courts will award interest provided they have been requested to do so when filing a claim. Usually, interest will be applied from the time the indemnity should have been paid.

      Usually, the interest rate applied is the average daily interest rate charged by financial institutions in Chile.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Monetary correction is applied and the general formula used for determining it is the inflation rate on a monthly base.

      However, in most of the insurance contracts entered into in Chile, both the premium and the indemnity to be paid are established in UF, which, as explained in question 13, is a unit of indexation with a value that varies daily in accordance with the inflation rate of the previous month, which resolves the problem of monetary correction.

      The date from which monetary correction will be applied will depend on the damages claimed. If material damages are claimed, that is to say direct damages and loss of earning, the majority of case law and doctrine agree that monetary correction shall be applied between the dates the complaint was served upon the defendant and the date when the payment of the sum awarded by the arbitrator or the court was made.

      Conversely, if moral damages were claimed, monetary correction will be applied between the date it was certified that no further remedy is available against the arbitrator’s award or the court’s final decision and the month that preceded the payment of the sum awarded.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Under Chilean law moral damages can be awarded, but only if claimed. They are intended to compensate the psychological pain, stress or suffering that the claimant has experienced.

      Moral damage tends to form the basis of liability (tort) claims, especially if there has been personal injury or death, and this usually accounts for most of the amount claimed.

      However, moral damages may be also claimed if a clear causal relationship can be established between the breach of a contract and the moral damage claimed, especially in those contracts that impose a duty of care, for example, a contract of carriage of passengers.

      Finally, moral damages may be compensated in those cases where, by reason of statutory provisions, moral damages can be compensated (eg, Law No. 6,744 on Social Insurance against Labour Accidents and Professional Diseases).

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Intermediaries

    • Chile

      In Chile, the intermediation of insurance and reinsurance contracts is a regulated activity and intermediaries are subject to the control of the SVS. Individuals and legal entities can assist in the intermediation of an insurance contract and they must be registered with the SVS.

      Pursuant to article 57 of the Insurance Companies Act, an insurance intermediary has a double duty of assistance: one towards the insured and one towards the insurer.

      In assisting the insured, the intermediary shall offer him or her the most convenient coverage according to his or her necessities, explaining to him or her the conditions of the contract and providing assistance during the validity of the policy, especially in the event of amendments and losses.

      Conversely, when assisting insurance companies, the intermediary shall confirm the identity of the contracting party, the existence of the insurance subject matter and shall furnish the insurer with all the information they have about the risk.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Intermediaries usually act on behalf of the insured or the reinsured in procuring appropriate coverage and assisting with claims.

      However, it is worth noting that, pursuant to article 16 of the Insurance Companies Act, if reinsurance is purchased in Chile from a foreign reinsurance company registered with the SVS through a reinsurance broker also registered with the SVS, the reinsurance broker will be deemed the legal representative of the foreign reinsurer. 

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      There is no doctrine of imputed knowledge under Chilean insurance law and practice.

      While insurance intermediaries owe a duty to insurers to provide all the information they have on the risk, as explained in question 32, this is a separate and independent duty from that of the insured who, as explained in question 6, is obliged to honestly answer all the questions made by the insurer to identify the insurance subject matter and assess the extension of the risk.

      Therefore, in order for the insurer to be able to avoid the policy on the grounds of a material fact known and not disclosed by the intermediary, he or she would have to prove that he or she questioned the insured about this material fact, that the insured knew about it and that the insured failed to disclose it, all in accordance with the test established in article 525 of the Code of Commerce, as explained in question 7.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Limitation

    • Chile

      The general rule is that the insured has four years to claim under the policy from the date the obligation becomes enforceable.

      If the policy is a life policy, the limitation period is also four years from the date the beneficiary learns about his or her right to claim an indemnity, but in any case, this action will be time-barred within 10 years from the date of the loss.

      In the case of a liability policy, the limitation period to claim cannot be inferior to the limitation period that the affected third party has to claim against the insured.

      The limitation period cannot be reduced by means of any contractual preclusion or expiration.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      The limitation period can only be interrupted by the notification of the loss and, in this case, it will start running again from the date the insurer informed the insured of his or her decision on the loss. Then, the limitation period can only be interrupted by the valid service of a complaint against the insurer or reinsurer.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

  • Other requirements

    • Chile

      For those insurance contracts to which the rules contained in the Code of Commerce are mandatory, the use of a policy form registered with the SVS is mandatory. In this case parties can only deviate from the terms and conditions included in the policy form that is registered only if the terms and conditions are more beneficial to the insured.

      However, in those insurance policies covering carriage of goods by land, marine and aircraft and those policies where the insured and the beneficiary are legal entities and the net annual premium is equal or above 200 UF, parties are free to agree the terms and conditions they prefer.

      Parties to a reinsurance contract are free to agree their own terms and conditions, including a different choice of substantive law. There are only a few mandatory rules contained in the Code of Commerce that apply to the reinsurance contract and their purpose is to protect the original insured, especially by avoiding delays in payment of an indemnity by reason of a reinsurance contract.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

    • Chile

      Over the past few months there has been discussions to introduce changes to health insurance, which may result in changes to the insurance law. While some of these proposals have come as part of the presidential and representative elections to be held in November 2017, no changes to the insurance and reinsurance law is expected in the short term.

      Last verified on Tuesday 3rd October 2017

Latin Lawyer gives you a fantastic platform to promote your legal expertise to our extensive readership base

Become an author

Contributing editors

Authors