C6 Flashcards
(101 cards)
1
Q
A
2
Q
659
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
ICA Division II (D and O):(165.2): duties of directors (1,2,3,4)/7
establish procedures & committees
A
659
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
ICA Division II (D and O):(165.2): duties of directors (1,2,3,4)/7
establish procedures & committees
- ESTABLISH PROCEDURE to resolve conflicts of interest
- ESTABLISH COMMITTEES: Audit committee, Conduct Review committee, committee to Monitor conflict resolution procedures
3
Q
660
E (2013.Fall 9b.i) 0.750 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (REVIEWS) (1,2,3)/7
REVIEW: (A/S).(other returns).(investments)
A
660
E (2013.Fall 9b.i) 0.750 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (REVIEWS) (1,2,3)/7
REVIEW: (A/S).(other returns).(investments)
- REVIEW A/S before Board of Director approval
- REVIEW such company returns as super may specify
- REVIEW (investments, transactions) with material adverse events brought to audit committee
4
Q
661
E (2013.Fall 9b.ii) 0.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (REQUIRE) (4)/7
..internal controls
A
661
E (2013.Fall 9b.ii) 0.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (REQUIRE) (4)/7
..internal controls
- REQUIRE mgmt to (implement, maintain) internal controls
5
Q
662
E (2013.Fall 9b.iii) 0.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (MEETINGS) (5,6,7)/7
MEET: (auditor).(actuary).(chief internal auditor)
A
662
E (2013.Fall 9b.iii) 0.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division II (D and O):(203.3): (E): duties of audit committee (MEETINGS) (5,6,7)/7
MEET: (auditor).(actuary).(chief internal auditor)
- MEET with AUDITOR: discuss Annual Report
- MEET with ACTUARY: discuss parts of Annual Report prepared by actuary
- MEET w/ CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR: discuss effectiveness of internal controls
6
Q
663
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division XII (F/S):(333.1): items Board of Dirctors must present to (shareholders, policyholders) @ AGM (5)
F/S (2 years), items related to auditor & actuary, by-laws
A
663
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-1 ICA Division XII (F/S):(333.1): items Board of Dirctors must present to (shareholders, policyholders) @ AGM (5)
F/S (2 years), items related to auditor & actuary, by-laws
- F/S (Financial Statements) for most recent 2 yrs
- Auditor’s report
- Actuary’s report
- Description of roles for auditor & actuary
- Anything else required by the by-laws of company
7
Q
664
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.1): CEO, COO can’t be AA unless..
time limit
A
664
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.1): CEO, COO can’t be AA unless..
time limit
- See legal requirements of AA #4
- Authorized by OSFI
- Time limit of appointment is 6 months
8
Q
665
E (2017.Fall 29b.) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): can CFO also be AA?
A
665
E (2017.Fall 29b.) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): can CFO also be AA?
- Yes, if: audit comm provides written statement to OSFI that requirements of both (CFO,AA) can be (adequately, independently) performed | OSFI authorizes appt
9
Q
666
E (2015.Spring 32a.) 1.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): CFO can’t be AA unless..
A
666
E (2015.Spring 32a.) 1.000 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): CFO can’t be AA unless..
dit comm provides written statement to OSFI that reqs of both (CFO,AA) can be (adequately ,independently) performed | OSFI authorizes appt | AND list the LEGAL REQUIREMENTS to be an AA and/or OSFI’S EXPECTATIONS for the AA (not just the EXTRA stuff a CFO must satisfy)
10
Q
667
E (2013.Fall 34c.) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): CFO can’t be AA unless..
A
667
E (2013.Fall 34c.) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(359.2): CFO can’t be AA unless..
- Audit comm provides written stmt to OSFI that reqs of both (CFO,AA) can be (adequately ,independently) performed | OSFI authorizes appt
11
Q
668
E (2017.Fall 29a.) 0.750 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(361): ways an actuary may cease to be the AA (4)
A
668
E (2017.Fall 29a.) 0.750 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(361): ways an actuary may cease to be the AA (4)
- Appt revoked by Board of Directors | resignation | death | the person ceases to be an actuary (Ex: FCIA designation revoked due to disc. action)
12
Q
669
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(362): what must Board of Directors do upon AA vacancy
A
669
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(362): what must Board of Directors do upon AA vacancy
- Notify OSFI & fill vacancy
13
Q
670
E (2018.Fall 30c.i) 0.250 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(363): what must AA do upon revocation/resignment
A
670
E (2018.Fall 30c.i) 0.250 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(363): what must AA do upon revocation/resignment
- See legal requirements of AA #7
- Write report outlining circumstances & reasons
- Send to (Board of Directors, OSFI)
14
Q
671
E (2018.Fall 30c.ii) 0.250 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(364): what must prospective replacement AA do
A
671
E (2018.Fall 30c.ii) 0.250 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(364): what must prospective replacement AA do
- REQUEST written report on circumstances & reasons for prior AA leaving | if not RECEIVED in 15 days, new AA appointment may simply be accepted
15
Q
672
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(366): AA’s right to info & protection from liab
AA can request..w/o..
A
672
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(366): AA’s right to info & protection from liab
AA can request..w/o..
- AA may request (records,explanations) from (Board of Directors,officers,empl,reps) | AA can’t be held liable for such good faith requests
16
Q
673
E (2018.Fall 30b.i) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(368): reporting reqs of AA to BoD
A
673
E (2018.Fall 30b.i) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(368): reporting reqs of AA to BoD
- AA roles & duties 3&4:
- Provide report on Financial Position (annually)
- Provide report on Financial Condition, usually DCAT (when directed by super)
17
Q
674
E (2018.Fall 30b.ii) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(369.1): reporting reqs of AA to CEO
A
674
E (2018.Fall 30b.ii) 0.500 pts
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(369.1): reporting reqs of AA to CEO
- AA roles & duties 5:
- Report on MAE (Material Adverse Events) that require recitification –> (CEO,CFO,cc:BoD)
18
Q
675
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(369.3) if no suitable action on MAE then?
A
675
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(369.3) if no suitable action on MAE then?
- Send original report on MAE to OSFI | cc:BoD
19
Q
676
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(370): what is qualified privilege
A
676
ICA VI: Corporate Governance
Qz-2 ICA Division XIV (Actuaries):(370): what is qualified privilege
- IF AA makes good faith report under (363,369) THEN AA won’t be liable in civil action seeking indemnification | (363, 396) = (report from outgoing AA, report MAE)
20
Q
677
ICA X: Adequacy of Capital, Liquid & Assets
ICA X (Adequacy of Cap, Liq, Assets):(516.4): (E): power of superintendent regarding assets
A
677
ICA X: Adequacy of Capital, Liquid & Assets
ICA X (Adequacy of Cap, Liq, Assets):(516.4): (E): power of superintendent regarding assets
- Superintendent may direct comoany to increase assets even if they are otherwise complying with regulations
21
Q
678
E (2016.Spring 1c.) 0.500 pts
ICA XIII: Foreign Companies
Qz-3 ICA XIII (Foreign Companies):(581): (E): requirements for foreign companies (before issuing insurance): (5)
5m.appoint.establish.MCT.other
A
678
E (2016.Spring 1c.) 0.500 pts
ICA XIII: Foreign Companies
Qz-3 ICA XIII (Foreign Companies):(581): (E): requirements for foreign companies (before issuing insurance): (5)
5m. appoint.establish.MCT.other
1. Must have ASSETS > 5m vested in trust (or as per super) | must APPOINT (actuary, auditor) | must ESTABLISH chief agency | must have min MCT / BAAT ratio | any other conditions super deems appropriate
22
Q
679
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn reform:Would Canadian tort reform be provincial OR federal
A
679
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn reform:Would Canadian tort reform be provincial OR federal
- Provincial: (needs to be coordinated with the various Attorneys General)
23
Q
680
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:Position of insurance industry (& why)
A
680
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:Position of insurance industry (& why)
- Insurance industry WANTS REFORM:
- Lowers COSTS
- Increases STABILITY & PREDICTABILITY of awards
24
Q
681
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:Position of Supreme Court
A
681
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:Position of Supreme Court
- SupCrt will continue to be plaintiff-friendly UNLESS insurance industry gets reform enacted
25
682
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:**Position of trial lawyers (& why)**
682
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-1 Cdn tort reforms:**Position of trial lawyers (& why)**
1. Don't want reform (compensation for both plaintiffs and lawyers could be lower)
26
683
*E (2015.Fall 5b.) 0.750 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 Cdn tort reforms:**Identify potential reforms to Canada's plaintiff-friendly tort system (4)**
JCCV
683
*E (2015.Fall 5b.) 0.750 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 Cdn tort reforms:**Identify potential reforms to Canada's plaintiff-friendly tort system (4)**
JCCV
1. J&S liability
* Eliminate
* Replace with proportionate liability
* Created fund for guilty parties who can't pay
2. Collateral source rule
* Eliminate
3. Compensatory basis
* Change from gross to net basis
1. Vicarious liability
* Eliminate
27
684
*E (2019.Spring 7a.i) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Define J&S (Joint & Several) liability**
plaintiff may recover..
684
*E (2019.Spring 7a.i) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Define J&S (Joint & Several) liability**
plaintiff may recover..
1. Plaintiff may recover (ANY or ALL damages) from (ANY or ALL defendants) regardless of share of liability
28
685
*E (2019.Spring 7b.i) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Describe the proposed REFORM for J&S liability (3)**
ERF (eliminate, replace, fund)
685
*E (2019.Spring 7b.i) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Describe the proposed REFORM for J&S liability (3)**
ERF (eliminate, replace, fund)
1. ELIMINATE J&S: for non-pecuniary damages
2. REPLACE J&S: with rule of proportional liability
3. FUND creation: for guilty parties that can't pay
29
686
*E (2017.Spring 6d.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Describe proportionate liability**
686
*E (2017.Spring 6d.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 J&S liability:**Describe proportionate liability**
1. Each defendant bears a cost proportionate to their degree of fault or liability
30
687
*E (2019.Spring 7a.iii) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 collateral source rule:**Define the 'collateral source rule' & provide an example of a collateral source**
687
*E (2019.Spring 7a.iii) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 collateral source rule:**Define the 'collateral source rule' & provide an example of a collateral source**
* Evidence of plaintiff's collateral source need not be entered AT TRIAL
1. (examples include sick pay & disability)
* So there is potential for over-compensation
31
688
*E (2019.Spring 7b.iii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 collateral source rule:**Describe the proposed REFORM for the 'collateral source rule'**
688
*E (2019.Spring 7b.iii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 collateral source rule:**Describe the proposed REFORM for the 'collateral source rule'**
1. Eliminate (& allow collateral sources to be taken into account when determining award)
32
689
*E (2019.Spring 7a.ii) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 compensatory basis:**Define 'compensatory basis' in the context of income replacement**
basis for loss of income
689
*E (2019.Spring 7a.ii) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 compensatory basis:**Define 'compensatory basis' in the context of income replacement**
basis for loss of income
1. Compensatory basis:
* Refers to basis for compensating loss of income
* The basis can be either prior net income OR prior gross income
* Income replacement is a percentage of this basis
* current practice uses a percentage of gross income
2. Comment:
* Gross basis ignores taxes & work-related expenses that aren't incurred when not working
* So there is potential for over-compensation
33
690
*E (2019.Spring 7b.ii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 compensatory basis:**Describe the proposed REFORM to 'compensatory basis' in the context of income replacement**
690
*E (2019.Spring 7b.ii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 compensatory basis:**Describe the proposed REFORM to 'compensatory basis' in the context of income replacement**
1. Switch from gross to net basis
34
691
*E (2014.Fall 8a.v) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 vicarious liability:**Define 'vicarious liability' and provide an example**
where 1 party is..
691
*E (2014.Fall 8a.v) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 vicarious liability:**Define 'vicarious liability' and provide an example**
where 1 party is..
* Where one party is held responsible for actions of another
* EXAMPLES: employee, subordinate, sublease, car rental, sexual abuse
35
692
*E (2014.Fall 8a.v) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 vicarious liability:**Describe the proposed reform to 'vicarious liability'**
692
*E (2014.Fall 8a.v) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-2 vicarious liability:**Describe the proposed reform to 'vicarious liability'**
1. Eliminate
36
693
*E (2017.Fall 6b.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads: **identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'joint & several liability' reform**
deep pockets
693
*E (2017.Fall 6b.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads: **identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'joint & several liability' reform**
deep pockets
1. Advantage:
* Discourages search for deep pockets & decreases costs
2. Disadvantage:
* There is a cost to determining proportionate liability
* Parties would tend to argue for a lower percentage
37
694
*E (2014.Fall 8a.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'collateral source rule' reform**
over-compensation
694
*E (2014.Fall 8a.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'collateral source rule' reform**
over-compensation
1. Advantage:
* Reduces possibility of over-compensation
2. Disadvantage:
* Guilty party may not provide full compensation (but they should)
38
695
*E (2016.Fall 7d.iii) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'compensation basis' reform**
over-compensation
695
*E (2016.Fall 7d.iii) 0.000 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'compensation basis' reform**
over-compensation
1. Advantage:
* Reduces possibility of over-compensation
2. Disadvantage:
* Interferes with INTENTIONAL government tax break for injured party
39
696
*E (2014.Fall 8a.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'vicarious liability' reform**
deep pockets
696
*E (2014.Fall 8a.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-3 ads/disads:**Identify an advantage & disadvantage of 'vicarious liability' reform**
deep pockets
1. Advantage:
* Discourages search for deep pockets
2. Disadvantage:
* ALL involved parties should be held responsible REGARDLESS of level of liability
40
697
*E (2012.Fall 12b.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**How does 'joint & serveral liability' increase efficiency**
697
*E (2012.Fall 12b.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**How does 'joint & serveral liability' increase efficiency**
* Reduces time & costs: promotes pre-trial settlement since damages don't have to be apportioned
41
698
*E (2015.Spring 10b.i) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to defendant (1-1)**
698
*E (2015.Spring 10b.i) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to defendant (1-1)**
1. Advantage: can share burden
2. Disadvantage: may have to pay a greater proportion THAN the degree of liability
42
699
*E (2015.Spring 10b.ii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to plaintiff (1-0)**
699
*E (2015.Spring 10b.ii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to plaintiff (1-0)**
1. Advantage: increases probability of full compensation WITH access to assets of all defendants
2. Disadvantage: none
43
700
*E (2015.Spring 10b.iii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to insurers (1-1+)**
700
*E (2015.Spring 10b.iii) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to insurers (1-1+)**
1. Advantage: can share burden
2. Disadvantage: may have to pay a greater proportion THAN the degree of liability --\> (cost,unpredictability) UP
44
701
*E (2015.Spring 10b.iv) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to lawyer (1-1)**
701
*E (2015.Spring 10b.iv) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 J&S liability supp:**(advantage OR disadvantage) with respect to lawyer (1-1)**
1. Advantage: increases efficiency in legal system since it promotes settlement without trial
2. Disadvantage: fewer cases go to court (lawyers get less $$$s)
45
702
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
other:**What are other issues in Cdn tort reform, aside from JCCV (5)**
class action, sanctions, structured settlements, prejudgment interest (pecuniary & non-pecuniary damages)
702
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
other:**What are other issues in Cdn tort reform, aside from JCCV (5)**
class action, sanctions, structured settlements, prejudgment interest (pecuniary & non-pecuniary damages)
* Class action lawsuits (need to reform laws)
* Sanctions (should be imposed for frivolous lawsuits)
* Requirement of structured settlement if future care necessary (so victim doesn't blow it on lottery tickets!)
* Pre-judgement interest on NON-PECUNIARY damages: do not allow
* Pre-judgement interest on PECUNIARY damages: yes, but measured from date claimant notifies defendant
46
707
*E (2016.Spring 7a.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Give an example of a defendant group negatively impacted by J&S liability & state the impact**
707
*E (2016.Spring 7a.) 0.500 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Give an example of a defendant group negatively impacted by J&S liability & state the impact**
1. GROUP: defendants in asbestos injury suits
2. IMPACT: many defendants are bankrupt, others may pay more than their fair share under J&S
47
708
*E (2017.Spring 6c.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Disadvantage of simple elimination J&S liability**
708
*E (2017.Spring 6c.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Disadvantage of simple elimination J&S liability**
* If a defendant goes bankrupt then there is no recourse to assets of other defendants
* Plaintiff may not be fully compensated
48
709
*E (2016.Spring 7d.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Remedy to disadvantage of simple elimination of J&S**
709
*E (2016.Spring 7d.) 0.250 pts*
HARRIS.TORT: ALL
Qz-4 other:**Remedy to disadvantage of simple elimination of J&S**
1. Creation of a fund for guilty parties that can't pay their share
49
710
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Define 'non-pecuniary damages'**
710
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Define 'non-pecuniary damages'**
* Damages that are not readily quantified
* Pain and suffering beyond compensation for medical care and loss of income
50
711
*E (2017.Spring 5a.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Describe the Trilogy ruling**
711
*E (2017.Spring 5a.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Describe the Trilogy ruling**
1. Supreme Court of Canada established a 100K cap on non-pecuniary damages
2. (later given an inflation adjustment, and subject to certain exceptions)
51
712
*E (2018.Spring 6a.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Describe reasons for caps on general (non-pecuniary) damages (4)**
limitless claims, social burden, full compensation, predictability
712
*E (2018.Spring 6a.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Describe reasons for caps on general (non-pecuniary) damages (4)**
limitless claims, social burden, full compensation, predictability
* LIMITLESS claims by the severely injured lead to extravagant awards
* Extravagant awards lead SOCIAL BURDEN (AA issues)
1. (where AA = Availability/Affordability)
* Plaintiff would already be FULLY COMPENSATED for loss of income & future care
* Ensures PREDICTABILITY of awards
1. (creates good environment for insurers → more insurers & more consumer choice)
52
713
*E (2018.Spring 6b.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Identify exceptions to Trilogy decision (caps removed) (3)**
sexual abuse, defamation, negligence
713
*E (2018.Spring 6b.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Identify exceptions to Trilogy decision (caps removed) (3)**
sexual abuse, defamation, negligence
* Sexual abuse (S.Y. v F.G.C.)
* Defamation (Hill v Church of Scientology, Young v Bella)
* Negligence causing financial loss
53
714
*E (2014.Fall 5c.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Dscribe the resaon for the Supreme Court's exceptions to Trilogy cap**
714
*E (2014.Fall 5c.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Dscribe the resaon for the Supreme Court's exceptions to Trilogy cap**
1. No evidence that these exceptional cases would increase cost of insurance or social burden
54
715
*E (2012.Fall 7b.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Effect of cap on equity between (minor, severe) injuries**
715
*E (2012.Fall 7b.) 0.500 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-1 Trilogy:**Effect of cap on equity between (minor, severe) injuries**
* Minor injuries are OVER-compensated
* Major injuries are UNDER-compensated
1. (because past a certain severity, there is no longer a distinction based on severity)
55
716
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**3 relevant cases (with factoid for each)**
716
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**3 relevant cases (with factoid for each)**
* Fenn v City of Peterborough (only award \> cap)
* Lindal v Lindal (commented on inflation-adjustment)
* Ter Neuzen v Korn (JPD-\> ROL)
56
717
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1979) Fenn v Peterborough: Facts**
only award OVER 100K
717
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1979) Fenn v Peterborough: Facts**
only award OVER 100K
1. Plaintiff was very severely injured
57
718
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Fenn v Peterborough: Issues**
718
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Fenn v Peterborough: Issues**
1. When can general damages EXCEED the 100K cap? (Recall that TRILOGY already has exceptions for sexual abuse & defamation.)
2. CONSIDERATIONS:
* Inflation adjustment since Trilogy?
* Should severity of plaintiff's injuries be taken into account?
58
719
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Fenn v Peterborough: Ruling 1,2**
719
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Fenn v Peterborough: Ruling 1,2**
1. Original Trial: not discussed in reading | APPEAL: plaintiff awarded 125K (higher than 100K cap) | no further appeal so SUPREME COURT didn't comment
59
720
*E (2017.Spring 5b.i) 0.100 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1981) Lindal v Lindal: Facts / Ruling 1,2**
720
*E (2017.Spring 5b.i) 0.100 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1981) Lindal v Lindal: Facts / Ruling 1,2**
1. JURY AWARD: 135K
2. InsR APPEAL: award reduced to 100K by BCCA (BC Court of Appeals)
3. plaintiff appealed to Supreme Court
60
721
*E (2017.Spring 5b.ii) 0.150 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Issues**
721
*E (2017.Spring 5b.ii) 0.150 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Issues**
1. When should general damages EXCEED 100K cap? (TRILOGY: exceptional cases ok)
2. CONSIDERATIONS: [1] inflation adjustment since Trilogy? [2] should severity of plaintiff's injuries be taken into account?
61
722
*E (2017.Spring 5b.iii) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Ruling 3 (Supreme Court)**
722
*E (2017.Spring 5b.iii) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Ruling 3 (Supreme Court)**
1. Supreme Court supported BCCA decision BUT STATED |1] 100K s/b indexed for inflation to a specific point in time (1978)
2. severity of injuries SHOULD NOT be considered since general damages are not meant to be compensatory
62
723
*E (2017.Spring 5b.iii) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Implication of a Supreme Court appeal for Fenn v Peterborough**
723
*E (2017.Spring 5b.iii) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Lindal v Lindal: Implication of a Supreme Court appeal for Fenn v Peterborough**
1. LIKELY OUTCOME: award lowered to an inflation-adjusted 100K (only 1-2 years had passed since Fenn v Peterborough, so inflation adjustment would result in award lower than 125K)
2. severity of plaintiff's injury should not be considered
63
724
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1995) ter Neuzen v Korn: Facts**
JPD became RoL
724
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**(1995) ter Neuzen v Korn: Facts**
JPD became RoL
1. Plaintiff infected w/ HIV in medical procedure
64
725
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Issues**
725
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Issues**
1. When should GenDmgs \> 100K cap?
2. jury award \> Trilogy cap (even with inflation) so should court just subsitute its own award
65
726
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 1**
726
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 1**
1. 1. award: 460K (GenDmgs)
2. Appeals Court ordered new trial because 460K \> 100K (Trilogy's rough upper limit)
66
727
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 2 (appeal)**
727
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 2 (appeal)**
1. Ruling: over-turned (for insurer) - no award, so cap is moot (although court would have substituted a capped award anyway)
67
728
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 3 (Supr Crt)**
728
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-2 after Trilogy:**Ter Neuzen v Korn: Ruling 3 (Supr Crt)**
1. Supreme Court comment: reinforced Trilogy -\> cap status: (judicial policy directive) became (rule of law)
68
729
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**(2006) Facts + Ruling 1**
729
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**(2006) Facts + Ruling 1**
1. Lee severely injured
* Jury at 1st trial awarded 2m, but judge reduced the award to 294K (i.e. inflation-adjusted 100K)
* Lee appealed to BCCA (British Columbia Court of Appeals)
69
730
*E (2015.Spring 5c.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**Issues / Arguments (regarding cap)**
VII
730
*E (2015.Spring 5c.) 0.750 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**Issues / Arguments (regarding cap)**
VII
1. VIOLATES charter of rights
* Cap discriminates against the seriously injured
2. IGNORES the importance of juries (because judge overturned jurty award)
3. INCONSISTENT
* Cap is onconstistent with current community values
* Communities are now more accepting of disabilities
70
731
*E (2017.Spring 5c.) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**Ruling 2 (appeal) + reasons (2), Ruling 3 (Supreme Court)**
731
*E (2017.Spring 5c.) 0.250 pts*
Dav.NonPec: ALL
Qz-3 Lee v Dawson:**Ruling 2 (appeal) + reasons (2), Ruling 3 (Supreme Court)**
1. BCCA judges decision:
* BCCA was sympathetic but couldn't overturn the original Supreme Court ruling on Trilogy
* Also, non-pecuniary damages not meant to be compensatory
2. Note:
* Supreme Court DECLINED to hear a further appeal
* Cap remains in effect well into the future & the original rationale still considered valid
71
732
*E (2019.Spring 4c.) 0.000 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Prohibited risk classification elements (6)**
C-CONES
732
*E (2019.Spring 4c.) 0.000 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Prohibited risk classification elements (6)**
C-CONES
1. Claims where fault less than 25%
2. Credit history
3. Occupation (some exceptions)
4. Net worth
5. Employment history
6. Salary
72
733
*E (2019.Spring 4c.i) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → retiree discount on all coverages**
733
*E (2019.Spring 4c.i) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → retiree discount on all coverages**
1. Yes (this discount is actually REQUIRED by Ontario regulations)
73
734
*E (2019.Spring 4c.ii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → multi-line discount varying by property product**
734
*E (2019.Spring 4c.ii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → multi-line discount varying by property product**
1. No (this is a trick question):
* Multi-line discounts ARE permitted
* But they CANNOT vary by property product
1. (cannot have a 10% for houses but a 5% discount for condos)
74
735
*E (2019.Spring 4c.iii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → good credit discount**
735
*E (2019.Spring 4c.iii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Complies with Ontario regulations (yes/no)? → good credit discount**
1. No (use of credit in Ontario personal auto is not permitted)
75
736
*E (2018.Fall 6a.) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer cancel your policy if you become unemployed?**
736
*E (2018.Fall 6a.) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer cancel your policy if you become unemployed?**
1. NO: employment is prohibited risk classification element
76
737
*E (2018.Fall 6d.) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer non-renew because of a drunk-driving conviction**
737
*E (2018.Fall 6d.) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer non-renew because of a drunk-driving conviction**
1. YES: it's ok to use convictions for underwriting
77
738
*E (2016.Fall 2a.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer lower your rates because your salary increased?**
738
*E (2016.Fall 2a.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer lower your rates because your salary increased?**
1. NO: salary is a prohibited risk classification element
78
739
*E (2016.Fall 2b.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer change your rates because you moved?**
739
*E (2016.Fall 2b.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer change your rates because you moved?**
1. YES: territory is a valid rating variable
79
740
*E (2016.Fall 2c.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer raise your rates if you become an Uber driver?**
740
*E (2016.Fall 2c.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer raise your rates if you become an Uber driver?**
1. YES: use is a valid rating variable
80
741
*E (2016.Fall 2d.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer lower your rates because you own a certain credit card?**
741
*E (2016.Fall 2d.) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-1 A:**Can an insurer lower your rates because you own a certain credit card?**
1. NO: credit history as well as number or type of credit cards is a prohibited risk classification element
81
742
*E (2014.Fall 3a.i) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the types/subtypes of approval processes - types (2) + subtypes (2)**
742
*E (2014.Fall 3a.i) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the types/subtypes of approval processes - types (2) + subtypes (2)**
* Prior approval (major requirements, simplified guidelines)
* File & use (major requirements, minor requirements)
82
743
*E (2019.Spring 4b.i) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the requrements to use simplified guidelines - i - numerical (3)**
all coverages, territories, individual changes
743
*E (2019.Spring 4b.i) 0.500 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the requrements to use simplified guidelines - i - numerical (3)**
all coverages, territories, individual changes
* Changes to all coverages combined \<= 0%
* Changes to territorial base rate & relativities between (-15%, 5%)
* All individual chgs \< 15%
83
744
*E (2019.Spring 4b.ii) 0.000 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the requirements to use simplified guidelines - ii - descriptive (2)**
discounts, rating algorithm
744
*E (2019.Spring 4b.ii) 0.000 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**List the requirements to use simplified guidelines - ii - descriptive (2)**
discounts, rating algorithm
* New discounts ok (except UBIP) IF identical to another insurer
* Can't change rating algorithm EXCEPT for new discounts
84
746
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**Describe the UDAP (Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices) requirement regarding rate levels among affiliates**
746
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 A:**Describe the UDAP (Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices) requirement regarding rate levels among affiliates**
1. Basically, it is unfair or deceptive if the insurer fails to provide the lowest rate among all affiliates
85
747
*E (2014.Fall 3a.ii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (prior approval) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
747
*E (2014.Fall 3a.ii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (prior approval) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
1. FSCO approves (rates, rate changes, risk classification) before use
2. Examples: (PPA on OAP1, FA)
86
748
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (expedited approval) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
748
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (expedited approval) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
1. It is a type of prior approval with approval in 30 days
2. Example: (PPA on OAP1, excludes FA)
87
749
*E (2014.Fall 3a.iii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (file & use) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
749
*E (2014.Fall 3a.iii) 0.250 pts*
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**Describe FSCO (file & use) & give examples of vehicle classes to which it applies**
1. Insurer files (rates, rate changes, risk classification) THEN regulators have 30 days to approve otherwise rates can be used
2. Examples: (other than PPA, commercial, endorsements, excludes FA)
88
750
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**What is OCPF-44R**
750
Sections (A,B): Intro & Defns
Qz-2 B:**What is OCPF-44R**
* Coverage for 'underinsured MOTORIST' (as opposed to 'uninsured AUTO')
* It is the difference between (your TPL limit) & (at-fault driver's TPL limit)
89
751
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Officer certifications in major filings (timing & officer qualifications)**
751
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Officer certifications in major filings (timing & officer qualifications)**
1. Qualifications: CEO, COO, CFO, Chief Agent in Canada
2. When required: always
90
752
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**What filing items must an OFFICER certify (4)**
Officer: eGIRts
752
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**What filing items must an OFFICER certify (4)**
Officer: eGIRts
* Effective Dates: for new & renewal business
* Guidelines: must certify compliance
* Info/data: certify accuracy & completeness
* Rates: reasonable, not unfairly discriminatory, don't impair solvency
91
753
*E (2018.Spring 2d.) 0.500 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Actuarial certifications in major filings - (timing & required actuarial designation)**
753
*E (2018.Spring 2d.) 0.500 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Actuarial certifications in major filings - (timing & required actuarial designation)**
1. Qualifications: actuary must be FCIA
2. When required: when rates change or there is a new LOB (Line of Business)
92
754
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**What filing items must an ACTUARY certify (6)**
ActCert: Eva Dar(ling)
754
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**What filing items must an ACTUARY certify (6)**
ActCert: Eva Dar(ling)
* Effective Dates: for new & renewal business
* Vehicle classification system
* That Actuary has been authorized by insurer
* That Data is RelSuf (reliable & sufficient)
* That AAP (Accepted Actuarial Practice) was used
* That Risk classification system is reasonable
93
755
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Is actuary's certification needed for fleets?**
755
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-3 [3] certs:**Is actuary's certification needed for fleets?**
1. No, but it IS needed for (endorsements, commercial, vehicles insured by FA or Facility Association)
94
756
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**What information is generally required in a rate filing (3)**
DAM: Data, Assumptions, Methods
756
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**What information is generally required in a rate filing (3)**
DAM: Data, Assumptions, Methods
1. (data, narrative): all steps for rate changes
2. (assumptions, methods): regulator should be able to trace steps from raw data TO final rates
3. NOT REQUIRED: a specific methodology mandated by FSCO
95
757
*E (2015.Fall 1a.i) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding REINSURANCE**
757
*E (2015.Fall 1a.i) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding REINSURANCE**
1. EXCLUDE: reinsurance should not impact price charged to insured
96
759
*E (2017.Spring 7b.iv) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding CESSION to RSP**
759
*E (2017.Spring 7b.iv) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding CESSION to RSP**
1. INCLUDE: as if never ceded
97
760
*E (2017.Spring 7b.iv) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding FARM LOSSES**
760
*E (2017.Spring 7b.iv) 0.250 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[b] describe the treatment of loss data in filings regarding FARM LOSSES**
1. EXCLUDE: FA (Facility Association) sets their own prices using FARM loss data
98
761
*E (2018.Spring 2a.) 0.750 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[e] identify factors affecting the LENGTH of the loss trend period**
TEC
761
*E (2018.Spring 2a.) 0.750 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[e] identify factors affecting the LENGTH of the loss trend period**
TEC
* Term (policy term)
* Effective date (proposed effective date of rate change)
* Calculation date (valuation date of loss data)
* Other answers possible (just your general knowledge)
99
762
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[e] describe the general properties of coverages where premium trends are required**
inflation sensitivity, mix, CLEAR
762
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-4 [4] ActSpprt:**[e] describe the general properties of coverages where premium trends are required**
inflation sensitivity, mix, CLEAR
* Coverages with inflation-sensitive exposure bases
* Where mix is changing (Ex: physical damage make/model)
* For CLEAR filings: but note that premium trend is already accounted for in development of rate groups
* CLEAR = Canadian Loss Experience Automobile Rating
100
763
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-2 [4] ActSpprt:**[k] identify regulatory requirements when changing _territory factors_ in a major filing (DIFFERENT than a simplified filing)**
rebase, calculate, check
763
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-2 [4] ActSpprt:**[k] identify regulatory requirements when changing _territory factors_ in a major filing (DIFFERENT than a simplified filing)**
rebase, calculate, check
1. REBASE (current, indicated, proposed) territorial relativities
2. TE (indicated change, proposed change)
3. Br\> - (indicated, proposed) changes have the same sign
* Magnitude (proposed change) \< magnitude (indicated change)
* Magnitude (propsed change) \< 10% }
101
765
*E (2014.Fall 3c.) 0.500 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-5 supp:**Why might FSCO not approve an auto filing (2)**
prohibited rating variable, unreasonable risk classification system
765
*E (2014.Fall 3c.) 0.500 pts*
FSCO.PPA (C): Major Filings
Qz-5 supp:**Why might FSCO not approve an auto filing (2)**
prohibited rating variable, unreasonable risk classification system
* Insurer used a prohibited rating variable
* Insurer's risk classification system is not reasonable (or not sufficiently predictive of loss)
