As Andrew Jones and Daniela Miklova report, the recent case of Ristorante Limited t/a Bar Massimo v Zurich Insurance plc [2021] EWHC 2538 is a useful insight into how the Court will interpret the questions and answers in insurers’ proposal forms in coverage disputes. It also shows how insurers can lose potential policy defences through the drafting of proposal form questions going wrong.

The Court of Appeal raises the bar for insolvent claimants on security for costs

The Federal Reserve announced the approval of a final rule to implement the Dodd-Frank resolution plan requirement set forth in Section 165(d) (the “Final Rule”). The Final Rule requires bank holding companies with assets of $50 billion or more and nonbank financial firms designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council to annually submit resolution plans to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC.

On Tuesday morning, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) Board unanimously approved two rules regarding resolution planning: one rule for large bank holding companies and nonbank financial companies supervised by the Federal Reserve Board of Governors (“FRB”),1 and the other rule for large banks.2

The FDIC Board approved a final rule on the orderly liquidation process, which was the culmination of a series of rulemaking efforts begun earlier this year. The rule implements several provisions of Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act. Title II establishes an “orderly liquidation authority” (the “OLA”) through which the FDIC can be appointed as receiver and liquidate a covered financial company, such as a bank holding company, whose failure threatens to have serious adverse effects on financial stability in the U.S.

The July 6, 2011 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Board of Directors (the “FDIC Board”) meeting marked the changing of the guard from Chairman Sheila Bair to FDIC Vice Chairman Martin Gruenberg. Chairman Bair’s valedictory meeting was not merely ceremonial; it also covered several key developments regarding the timing of a final rule on resolution plans under section 165(d) of Title I and a final rule on the Orderly Liquidation Authority (“OLA”) under Title II.

A. RESOLUTION PLANS/ LIVING WILLS

On Friday, the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions closed Bramble Savings Bank, headquartered in Milford, Ohio, and appointed the FDIC as receiver for the bank. As receiver, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with Foundation Bank, headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio, to assume all of the deposits of Bramble Savings Bank.

On Friday, the Office of Thrift Supervision closed Maritime Savings Bank, headquartered in West Allis, Wisconsin, and appointed the FDIC as receiver for the bank.

On Friday, the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance closed Bank of Ellijay, headquartered in Ellijay, Georgia, First Commerce Community Bank, headquartered in Douglasville, Georgia, and The Peoples Bank, headquartered in Winder, Georgia, and appointed the FDIC as receiver for each bank. The failed banks were not affiliated with one another.

On Friday, the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance closed ISN Bank, headquartered in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, and appointed the FDIC as receiver for the bank.