77
I agree with the ...
m.
A
to a test of solvency
Det ont In the several Accounts
In general, are an to the particular te proposed in 3 4 of the radim neus
-
conalley that this Section virule be me emended 6/
the Court to determine, in view of all the circumstances, taking into account, upon what they deem, under except sévine, proper bazon as to materiality and infecond
A after
bothe
contingent and prospective liabilities of the Company.
solvency or insolvency of the Company,
*o the
(3) Minor points arising on the sections on Ache
Grairenca, sx to which er diciums hum boun offerti.
Dealing
ཏཾ, ། ཏ,, དྷ ཀིཾ॰ with Rokadulse I & III of the Ordinance.
that 11 is quite reasonable to provide for the separate return
New and Renewal Premiums, and for the analysed items in respect
of Commission and Expenses of Management.
additions have been made la certain Colonial Life Assurance Compan-
les Acts, and are under consideration in comparison with me,
Somewhat al: Tre
of the Life Assurance Companies Acts 10-78; and the
Schedules to any such amending Act would probably take
the form proposed in the Ordinance.
in defining
As regards the difficulty, referred to by Me KUT
"New Premium", I think that it can be modified, dealt with by
setting out, in a note to the First and Third Schedule, that
"premiums received on New Policies" shall be understood to mean
premiums of the first year actually received or falling due
within the year of Account. The effect of this would be, for
instance, that, where the two first quarterly premiums paid under
a new policy had been received, or fall due, within the year of
Account, these would be included in the account under the head
of New Premium, whilst the third and fourth quarterly premiums
of the first year, which were received, or fall due, in the
following year of account, would be included as New Premiums in the
account for the following year. This is, in my opinion, the proper