0000000000303536
AUTHOR
Meinrad Dreher
Fitness of Members of Supervisory Board
This chapter deals with the fitness of members of supervisory boards. Since 2009, German insurance regulatory law has provided internal qualification standards for the supervisory board members of insurance companies. In accordance with Paragraph 7a, sec. 4, clause 1 of the VAG [German Insurance Supervision Act], the members of supervisory boards must be able to fulfill their tasks and supervisory functions in accordance with their level of expertise. This new requirement comports with the previous standards of German corporate law, established by the BGH [German Federal Court of Justice] in its “Hertie”-ruling. As such, this ruling will also serve as a basis to interpret the expertise requ…
Definition, Tasks and Legal Nature of the Compliance Function
This chapter addresses the compliance function under art. 46, para. 1 of the Solvency II Directive. The first items to be addressed here are the normative bases of compliance under the insurance supervisory regime and its conceptual content. Then, the tasks and relevant requirements for compliance under the insurance supervisory regime are identified. The chapter concludes by examining the function of compliance under the insurance supervisory regime of the Solvency II system.
Own Risk and Solvency Assessment
The own risk and solvency assessment under art. 45 of the Solvency II Directive forms the subject of this chapter. Initial attention is given to clarifying the role of ORSA in the insurance supervisory regime and the principles applicable to it. Then follows a discussion of the relationship of ORSA to the risk management function as well to the other key functions under the insurance supervisory regime. In conclusion, the chapter addresses, inter alia, the documentation, the public disclosure, and the supervisory powers involved in an ORSA procedure.
Insurance Supervisory Law and Consumer Protection
This chapter discusses the relationship between insurance supervisory law and consumer protection within the ambit of Solvency II and the EIOPA system. To this, the article focuses on existing laws, with particular regard given to European rules on insurance supervision. The Solvency II Directive takes as its exclusive objective the protection of insureds and insurance beneficiaries. Solvency II does not address consumer protection. Nevertheless, consumer protection is a significant by-product of the Solvency II rules, in the sense of collective consumer protection. The EIOPA Regulation provisions, too, address consumer protection solely in the realm of collective consumer protection. The a…
Integrating the Compliance Function into the Legal Department
This chapter addresses a governance issue: whether it is permissible under the insurance supervisory regime of Solvency II for an insurance undertaking to merge its compliance function with its legal department. The Solvency II provisions in fact do not address the legal department of an insurance undertaking. But the tasks and powers of a legal department are in part the same as those of the compliance function under art. 46, para. 1 of the Solvency II Directive. The conclusion is thus: General insurance supervisory regime principles such as functional segregation and functional independence do not prohibit such a merger. Indeed, such a merger would seem to be advisable in many instances i…
Die Kontrolle der Geschäftsleiter von Versicherungsunternehmen
Das Versicherungsaufsichtsrecht fordert, dass Geschaftsleiter von Versicherungsunternehmen, von Versicherungsholding-Gesellschaften, gemischten Finanzholding-Gesellschaften, Pensionsfonds, Pensionskassen und Schadenabwicklungsunternehmen zuverlassig und fachlich geeignet sind. Der Beitrag untersucht, wie diese Anforderungen zu bestimmen und in der Praxis anzuwenden sind.
Supervisory Review Process
This chapter addresses the legal outlining of the supervisory review process. There is an apparent contradiction between principles-based insurance supervision on the one hand and, on the other hand, legal certainty along with foreseeability of supervisory action under art. 36 of the Solvency II Directive. With this in view, the chapter next examines the objectives and subject matter of the supervisory review process, with particular scrutiny given to requirements relating to solvency and governance. The powers of supervisory authorities to remedy weaknesses and deficiencies are then taken up.
Definition and Holders of Key Functions
This chapter takes up the four key functions established in the Solvency II Directive. In this vein, the significance of the key functions is highlighted first. Then follows the analysis of the terms “key function” and “key function holders”, terms undefined in the Solvency II Directive. The next step points out the distinctions among key function holders and their subordinate staff members. A part of this breakdown is to examine in practice who exercises which function in an insurance undertaking. The chapter wraps up by looking at whether key functions are performed in a centralized or decentralized organization.
‘Senior Management’ of Insurance Undertakings
This chapter treats the subject of senior management in insurance undertakings. This subject comes into view because this category appears in the nomenclature of the Solvency II Level 3 draft rules. This then leads to the question whether there is a fit-and-proper-review above and beyond the limits drawn in art. 42 of the Solvency II Directive, a question ultimately answered in the negative.
Harmonization of Insurance Supervisory Law
This chapter addresses the fundamental issue of what degree of harmonization applies in the Solvency II system. Distinguishing among the several degrees of harmonization—minimum harmonization, maximum harmonization, and full harmonization—leads to the conclusion that the Solvency II Directive has full harmonization as its objective. This has two important ramifications: First, the Solvency II Directive requires that any insurance supervisory regime implementation by the respective national legislators must completely align with the European insurance supervisory regime. Second, a system of full harmonization prohibits national legislators from unilaterally enacting additional measures not p…
Kartellrechtliche Erfahrungssätze – Erfahrungssatzbasierte Anscheinsbeweise und tatsächliche Vermutungen
Zusammenfassung Europäische und nationale Kartellbehörden sowie Gerichte berufen sich immer häufiger auf Erfahrungssätze oder auf sonstige erfahrungsbasierte Beweiserleichterungen. In der Rechtspraxis erfolgt die erfahrungssatzbasierte Beweisführung regelmäßig ohne ausreichende Herleitung, inhaltliche Fundierung und begriffliche Differenzierung. Dem Beitrag geht es vor dem Hintergrund und der bisher weitgehend fehlenden literarischen Aufarbeitung dieser Entwicklungen um eine Bestandsaufnahme, eine systematische Einordnung und daraus abzuleitende Folgerungen für das Kartell(verfahrens)recht.
Supervisory Review of Key Functions
Picking up from the Chap. 7 examination of the term “key functions” and of the key function holders, this chapter undertakes an examination of the supervisory review of key functions. In particular, this inquiry involves the areas of supervision of the key function holders as to fit-and-proper monitoring, the issue of remuneration of key function holders, the duties of notice and disclosure attendant on a change in key function holders, and the powers of insurance supervisory authorities in the supervision of key function holders.