A new Angolan legal framework for the insurance and reinsurance activity was adopted in 2022 to improve the previous regime through the consecration of innovative solutions, regulate aspects that were poorly regulated in the previous regime, harmonize the concepts, and integrate into the respective scope, the substantive sanctioning regime for insurance business. Among various new regulated matters, it proposes a fronting regime, which allows insurance companies to underwrite insurance policies and place 100% of the assumed risk in the international reinsurance market. This article examines the drawbacks of a fronting regime designed in such a way for the Angolan insurance industry in face of the regulatory purposes, while also analysing African and other international perspectives on this subject matter. It argues that the current fronting regime does not accomplish its goals, inter alia, fostering national financial and building technical capacity. It makes some recommendations on more effective measures.

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the multifaceted debate surrounding the legality of ransomware payments and the associated insurance coverage. As ransomware attacks continue to threaten organizations worldwide, the question of whether paying ransoms and providing insurance coverage for it is contributing to criminal activity has taken center stage, with divergent points of view. By examining both the arguments against and in favour of these practices, this paper navigates the intricate legal and practical considerations at play and proposes alternatives to an outright ban on ransom payments, which could be considered by the UK Government. By evaluating potential regulatory frameworks and incentives, this paper aims to provide a well-rounded understanding of the issue while highlighting pathways for future policy development.

This article comparatively analyses the regimes on insurance warranties under English law and contractual duties of the insured under Turkish law. Where the underlying insurance is governed by Turkish law and the reinsurance contract is subject to English law, the distinctions between the regimes may cause mismatches between the covers. Such mismatches may result in coverage gaps, depending on the construction of the reinsurance contract and the position taken regarding the nature of reinsurance under English law. Coverage gaps can deprive the parties of the aimed benefits of the reinsurance arrangement. This article aims to draw attention to such possible areas of mismatch and make recommendations for achieving back-to-back covers.