Clico Life safe in law’s arms
Tuesday June 28 2011 | 03:57 AM

Its placement under judicial management has given troubled insurance company CLICO International Life Insurance Limited a temporary reprieve from legal action.

This means that a $10 million claim by Leroy Parris, former Executive Chairman of the company's parent CLICO Holdings (Barbados) Limited, will not proceed unless the court says so. 

This was disclosed this evening by judicial managers Deloitte Consulting Ltd, represented by Oliver Jordan and Patrick Toppin, following a front-page newspaper article yesterday on the issue.

Deloitte explained said that "in accordance with the Insurance Act and pursuant to the Court Order of April 29, 2011, all legal actions against CIL are stayed and can only proceed with the approval of the court".

"This would therefore include the previous claim by Parris against CIL," it noted.

"Since our firm's appointment on April 13, 2011 as Judicial Manager of CIL we have had no notice of any new legal actions being commenced by Parris or any other person(s)," Jordan and Toppin added.

The managers said there were "several errors contained in the front page article" regarding the legal claim by Parris, including that CLICO Holdings was the company under judicial management.

"The facts are ... CLICO Holdings (Barbados) is not under Judicial Management. Its subsidiary, CLICO International Life Insurance Ltd. was placed under Judicial Management effective April 13, 2011. Based on a further application by the Judicial Manager, the High Court approved an amended order on April 29, 2011 to clarify and issue clear directions," the Deloitte representatives said.

"In January 2011, an attorney-at-law on behalf of Leroy Parris initiated action against CLICO Holdings for unpaid bonuses and other contractual obligations.

"In January 2011, Parris' attorney-at-law also initiated action against CIL for repayment of amounts claimed for matured and surrendered policies held by Parris and his immediate family," they added.

They said the newspaper report was therefore "erroneous and gives the wrong impression as it relates to the insurance company which is currently under judicial management".