arrow-downcircle-playclosecrossdowndownward-rightdropdown-arrow-transparentdropdown-arrowemail-solidemailfacebook-solidfilterhamburgerillustration-aucklandillustration-wellingtonlayer-groupleftlinkedIn-solidlinkedIn-whitelinkedInloadermenuphonerestartrightsearchtwitter-solidupward-right-lgupward-rightvCard

Cover to Cover: Issue 36

  • Publications and reports

    24 September 2026

Cover to Cover: Issue 36

In this issue, we consider the Reserve Bank’s proposed reforms to the Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Act, which signal a significant shift from our “light touch” insurance regulatory regime toward a more intensive and risk-based prudential framework. We also review the Financial Markets Authority’s latest guidance on insurer incentives and sales campaigns and we consider the challenges of compliance when a regulator believes that prescriptive rules may not be enough to achieve desired regulatory outcomes.

Insurers should now be well under way with their preparations for the Contracts of Insurance Act 2024 coming into force next year. Its influence can be seen across many of the topics covered in this issue, including the duty of fair presentation, new obligations for policy drafting and unfair contract terms, disclosure of information and consumer rights.

We also look at other areas of law reform. Our feature on proportionate liability considers whether the insurance market is prepared to support the proposed new legislative framework for construction insurance and the importance of availability, affordability and capacity in determining its success. It is a timely reminder that legislative reform in the insurance industry can only achieve intended outcomes when it is supported by the market.

This issue includes three interesting case updates. We look at the English decision in Cometsambre, which offers an early indication of how courts may approach the new duty of fair presentation. We examine the Medibank decision in Australia and its lessons on litigation privilege in the context of insurer-commissioned reports. We also review the New Zealand High Court’s decision in Candida Trustee v Teak Construction (in liq), which highlights the evolving rules around claimants’ entitlements to information about a defendant’s insurance cover.

We conclude with a thought-provoking article which examines questions of disclosure, discrimination and policy interpretation in an unusual context. It is a reminder that insurance law often intersects with wider societal and legal issues in unexpected ways.

We hope you find this issue insightful, thought-provoking and practical, we’d be delighted to continue the conversation.


Read Cover to Cover


This issue is available in PDF or individual articles below: 

Proportionate liability meets market reality: Is the insurance sector ready?

When compliance isn’t enough: The FMA’s expanding view of insurer incentives

IPSA reform gathering pace: Key changes for New Zealand insurers

The CoIA’s new reality: Plain language meets unfair contract terms

When Jesus loves you, but your insurer doesn’t

Case update: Candida Trustee Company Ltd v Teak Construction Group Ltd

Case update: Medibank Private Limited v McClure

Case update: Cometsambre SA v Lloyd’s Insurance Company SA