The Legal Protection Insurance Market in...

1 2

The Legal Protection Insurance Market in EuropeDecember 2013

International Association of Legal Protection Insurance

The Legal Protection Insurance Market in Europe


Table of contents

1. Methodology and data source .......................................................................................................................................................................2 1.1 Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................................................2 1.2 Data sources .................................................................................................................................................................................................2 1.3 Definitions .....................................................................................................................................................................................................32. Premium income ..................................................................................................................................................................................................43. Share of legal protection insurance in non-life premium income .................................................................................................84. Penetration rate .................................................................................................................................................................................................105. Premium per capita ..........................................................................................................................................................................................126. Elements of the technical account ............................................................................................................................................................14 6.1 Claims paid and change in provisions ...........................................................................................................................................14 6.2 Operating expenses ...............................................................................................................................................................................18 6.3 Combined ratio ........................................................................................................................................................................................217. Legal protection insurance in the context of the financial crisis .................................................................................................238. Link between the development of the judicial system and legal protection insurance ..................................................25 8.1 Number of court cases .........................................................................................................................................................................25 8.2 The number of lawyers ........................................................................................................................................................................25 8.3 The legal aid ..............................................................................................................................................................................................26 8.4 Court fees and reimbursement ........................................................................................................................................................29 8.5 Alternative Dispute Resolution .........................................................................................................................................................29 8.6 Other factors .............................................................................................................................................................................................309. Service provision and legal aspects of legal protection insurance .............................................................................................31

ANNEXES : Data used in the publication ........................................................................................................................................................331. Data used in sections 2 to 5 .........................................................................................................................................................................332. Data related to legal protection insurance as used in section 6 ..................................................................................................35

Table of illustrationsFigure 1 Premium income in legal protection insurance in Europe ................................................................................................4Figure 2 Correlation between the GDP real growth rate and the legal protection premium growth rate in 2011 ...5Figure 3 Growth rate of premium income in Europe in 2010 and 2011 .......................................................................................6Figure 4 Breakdown of legal protection premium income per country in 2011 .......................................................................7Figure 5 Share of legal protection insurance in total non-life insurance premium income .................................................8Figure 6 Premium growth rate for non-life and legal protection insurance ................................................................................9Figure 7 Share of legal protection insurance in the non-life insurance market in 2010 and 2011, per country .........9Figure 8 Penetration rate of legal protection insurance in Europe (2002-2011) ....................................................................10Figure 9 Penetration rate per country in 2010 and 2011 ..................................................................................................................11Figure 10 Premium per capita in Europe (2002-2011) ..........................................................................................................................12Figure 11 Premium per capita in European countries (in €) (2010 and 2011) ...........................................................................13Figure 12 Claims paid by legal protection insurers in Europe ...........................................................................................................14Figure 13 Growth rate in legal protection claim expenditure in European countries (2010 and 2011) .........................15Figure 14 Evolution of loss ratios in Europe (2007-2011) ....................................................................................................................16Figure 15 Loss ratios in selected European countries (2010 and 2011) ........................................................................................17Figure 16 Operating expenses in Europe (2007-2011) .........................................................................................................................18Figure 17 Growth rate in operating expenses in selected countries (2010 and 2011) ...........................................................19Figure 18 Expense ratio for a sample of 8 countries (2007-2011)....................................................................................................19Figure 19 Expense ratios in selected European countries in 2010 and 2011 ..............................................................................20Figure 20 European combined ratios (2007-2011) based on a sample of 8 countries...........................................................21Figure 21 Combined ratios for selected European countries .............................................................................................................22Figure 22 Number of court cases in selected European countries ..................................................................................................25Figure 23 Evolution of the number of lawyers in European bar associations ............................................................................26Figure 24 Share of legal aid in total public budget allocated to all courts, public prosecution and legal aid .............27Figure 25 Number of cases granted with legal aid per 100 000 inhabitants ..............................................................................27Figure 26 Average amout of legal aid allocated per case ....................................................................................................................28Figure 27 Share of court fees (or taxes) in the court budget .............................................................................................................29Figure 28 Number of accredited mediators in 2006, 2008 and 2010 .............................................................................................30Figure 29 Services provided by legal protection insurers and legal restrictions in European countries ........................31

1


1.1 Methodology

The monetary unit used for financial data is the euro. For countries that are not part of the euro area, all data was converted into euro using the yearly average exchange rate published by EUROSTAT. The exchange rates used can be found in the annex.

When calculating year-on-year variations, countries for which complete data sets were not available were excluded if estimates could not be provided. During the financial crisis, there has been a strong depreciation of a few currencies against the euro, notably the pound sterling. In order to strip out the exchange rate effects and to better reflect economic reality, growth rates have been calculated on the basis of constant exchange rates for several indicators.

All data is expressed in millions of euro, unless otherwise stated. The data refers to the accounting year and not to the accident year.

1.2 Data sources

Sections 2-to-5

The data related to premium income presented in the sections 2-to-5 is extracted from the Insurance Europe statistics (http://www.insuranceeurope.eu/). All Insurance Europe data is provided by their members.

Please note that Insurance Europe data concerning Polish total legal protection premium income was replaced by data from the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (www.knf.gov.pl) as the Insurance Europe data was considered to be unreliable. Given the unavailability of data for Luxembourg, data concerning Luxembourg total legal protection premium income were extracted from the Annual reports of the National Supervisor (i.e. Commissariat aux Assurances - http://www.commassu.lu). The 2010 premium income for Spain was not consistent with the previous years and has been corrected in order to exclude the accepted reinsurance based on data from the Direccion General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones. The data presented in the annexes have been duly corrected.

The countries included in this report are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Please note that compared to previous years report Sweden is not included anymore due to lack of data.

The data covers the years 2002-to-2011 and is supposed to be final data. However, it should be noted that minor changes are always possible in the future. More recent data has not been provided by the Insurance Europe at the time of publishing this report. Please note that some data has been revised since last year.

GDP, population and exchange rate data is provided by EUROSTAT.

Section 6

Data sources used in section 6 vary from country to country. Despite taking care to provide consistency, it is not possible to ensure that all data are fully comparable. The methodology used to calculate the various indicators, and more particularly the claims cost and the administrative and acquisition costs, may vary from country to country. As much as possible, efforts have been made to reconcile the data and to indicate country specificities in the footnotes, as well as their potential impact on the indicator presented. However, some discrepancies may persist or may not have been identified due to a lack of information regarding the various methodologies used by the institutions collecting the data.

Given the two different sources of data used in sections 2-to-5 and in section 6, two different datasets related to the premium income were used, in order to safeguard the consistency of the data. These two datasets (which vary slightly) are presented in the annex.

Although all information used in this publication was taken carefully from reliable sources, RIAD does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy or the comprehensiveness of the information given. The information provided is for information purposes only and in no event shall RIAD be liable for any loss or damage arising from the use of this information.

The Netherlands (NL)Source : Verbond van Verzekeraars – Verzekered van cijfers 2009 / Dutch Insurance Industry in Figures http://www.verbondvanverzekeraars.nl/UserFiles/File/cijfers/VvC2011_totaal.pdfand De Nederlandsche Bank http://www.statistics.dnb.nl/financieele-instellingen/verzekeraars/toezichtgegevens-verzekeraars/index.jspPlease note that for the purpose of simplification all data relating to family, motor and enterprise covers were aggregated and that the number of claims and the average claim cost are only available for enterprises and Family (but not for motor).

1. Methodology and data source

2

The Legal Protection Insurance Market in Europe The Legal Protection Insurance Market in Europe

Germany (DE)Source : Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungs-wirtschaft e.V. – Statistical Yearbook of German Insurance 2010http://www.gdv.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Statistical-Yearbook-German-Insurance-2012.pdfPlease note that the administrative and acquisition costs were estimated from the combined and loss ratios.

Switzerland (CH)Source : Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) – Report Portalhttp://www.versichererreport.finma.ch/reportportal/Please note that the data relates to the direct business in Switzerland only.

Spain (ES)Source: Direccion General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensioneshttps://www.dgsfp.meh.es/sector/balancesycuentasEA.asp

Austria (AT)Source: Versicherungsverband Österreich - Jahresbericht 2011http://www.vvo.at/jahresbericht-zahlen-und-daten/364.html

Italy (IT)Source : Associazione Nazionale fra le Imprese Assicuratrici http://www.ania.it/export/sites/default/documenti/3b0f5436-c519-11e1-9542-f3c446ddba06___appendice_statistica2011.xls

Poland (PL)Source : Polish Financial Supervision Authorityhttp://www.knf.gov.pl/Images/III_Raporty_fin_2010_tcm75-27917.xlsPlease note that the combined, loss and expenses ratio were calculated on the basis of the gross earned premiums. The United Kingdom (UK)Source : Association of British InsurersData were provided by ABI up to 2008. Please note that the data relate only to the ABI members and therefore does not include Lloyds. ABI data represents approximately 80% of the UK market. The data refers to the total legal protection insurance market (i.e. before-the-event and after-the-event included).

Belgium (BE)Source: AssuraliaAssuralia link: http://www.assuralia.be/index.php?id=32&L=1Data refers to both motor and other legal protection covers. Internal costs of claims management are included in the claims costs.

Portugal (PT)Source : Instituto de Seguros de Portugal - Estatísticas de Seguroshttp://www.isp.pt/NR/exeres/34CBFBFE-40B5-4ECF-AA75-5934E13A57E4.htm

Luxembourg (LU)Source : Commissariat aux Assurances – Rapport annuelhttp://www.commassu.lu/FR/documents/Acrobat/Rapport_annuel_2010.pdfPlease note that the figure does not include foreign business.

France (FR)Source : Fédération Française des Sociétés d’Assurance (FFSA)Only 2008 data were provided by the FFSA. Therefore France is not included in the graphs and analysis that cover several years.

Estonia (EE)Source: Estonian Financial Supervision Authorityhttp://www.fi.ee/index.php?id=3273

Greece (GR)Source: Hellenic Association of Insurance Companies - Annual Statistical Reporthttp://www.eaee.gr/cms/eng/uploads/AnnualReport2011e.pdf

1.3 Definitions

Premiums: gross written premiums.

Claims cost or claims paid: includes both claims paid and the change in technical provision during the year.

Loss ratio: claims cost / gross written premium.

Expense ratio: administrative and acquisition costs / gross written premiums.

Combined ratio: loss ratio + expense ratio.

Penetration rate: premium income / GDP (GDP at current price in million of euro as provided by EUROSTAT).

Accident year: an accident year grouping of claims means that all the claims relating to events that occurred in a 12 months period are grouped together, irrespective of when they are actually reported or paid and irrespective of the year in which the period of cover commenced.

3


In 2011, the legal protection insurance market amounted to €7,432m compared to €7,319m in 2010. This represents growth (at constant exchange rates) of 1.2% which is well below the average growth rate of 5.5% observed over the last decade and below the 3.3% increase recorded in 2010.

The slowdown in the premium income growth rate recorded since 2008 can be partly explained by the severe economic crisis that affected European business and that decreased demand for almost all types of non-life insurance cover. This

is particularly true for legal protection insurance, in particular cover for businesses, which tends to reflect the evolution of general economic activity. However, the serious falloff in the premium growth rate observed in 2011 is rather new compared to the growth rate above 3% recorded in 2009 and 2010 and find primarily its explanation in a decrease of the premium income observed in some large EU markets like the United Kingdom and Spain that recorded respectively a decline of -15.3% and -28.2% in 2011.

2. Premium income1

Figure 1 Premium income in legal protection insurance in Europe

1 Some figures presented in this section may differ from those published in the previous report due to the revision of provisional data. All changes are intended to improve the accuracy and comparability of the data.

2 It has to be noted that the positive slope of the trend line in the Figure 2 is partly influenced by the outlier position of Estonia which recorded an exceptionally high increase in its premium income in 2011. However, removing Estonia does not affect the positive correlation.

The rebound in the economy observed in 2010 (+2%) and 2011 (+1.7%) (compared to -4.4% in 2009) has not contributed to bring back the growth rate in income of legal protection insurers close to its ten years average (see Figure 1). However, it may occur with a lag effect. A comparison of the growth rate recorded in the different EU markets for the specific year of 2011 shows that differences in the real economic activity may also marginally explain this slowdown and is illustrated by the positive correlation between the GDP real growth rate and the legal protection premium growth rate in 2011 (see Figure 2)2.

The premium income growth rate (1.2%) being below the inflation rate observed in the EU (3.1%), this means that on

average the real premium income for insurers has decreased by a rough 2%. In addition, this slowdown in the premium growth rate happens in the context of a decreasing rate of return on investment which also constitutes a non negligible share of their income. This is even more the case for long tail business like the legal protection insurance. All in all, the premiums continue to grow at a moderate pace but this is likely to impact the profitability of the legal protection insurance sector in a context of increasing inflation and decreasing investment income. The situation is maybe not yet serious but requires insurers to remain cautious in the management of their price policy and avoid starting a price war that could further decrease their profitability.

(Source INSURANCE EUROPE)

4


5

As usually and as indicated here above, the average observed at the EU level encompasses very different reality across national markets3. The average growth rate in legal protection premium income strongly reflect the growth rate in large markets and in particular in Germany that represents around 45% of the EU market of legal protection insurance. In 2011, only 6 countries out of 23 recorded a speed up of their growth rate (i.e. a higher growth rate than in 2010) while they were twice as much in 2010. It can therefore be concluded that the slowdown in the evolution of the aggregate premium income is not the result of a few countries but a general trend observed in most countries.

More striking is the increasing number of countries that recorded a decrease in legal protection premiums: while in 2010 only three countries recorded a decrease in the premium income compared to 2009, they are six in 2011. The size of these drops are also stronger than those recorded in 2010 with negative growth rates reaching -29.2% in Poland, - 28.2% in Spain or -15.3% in the United Kingdom.

In 2009, southern European countries (Greece, Spain and to a lesser extend Italy) that experienced the most difficulties in the current crisis recorded the lowest growth rate with the noticeable exception of Portugal that recorded a negative growth rate in 2009 (-24%) followed by a strong rebound in 2010 (+56%). In 2011, some of those countries (Greece and Spain) continue to record very low growth rates in their premium income but have now been joined by some Eastern countries like Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria. The drop observed in the UK in 2010 and 2011 does not seem to reflect a decrease in the market size of this country but rather an increase of the business which is written offshore in Guernsey, Gibraltar or in Continental Europe. Therefore, at the aggregate level it is likely that the drop recorded in the UK is partly compensated by some rise in other EU countries. However, a part of the slowdown observed in the UK might also partly be related to the austerity program of the British government which started in 20114.

The highest growth rates were recorded in Estonia, Turkey, Denmark, Luxembourg and the Czech Republic which all

3 It should be underlined that the freedom for companies to sell insurance services across the border in Europe does not always allow a perfect comparison of the national markets. As the business written off in a country A might be recorded in the accounts of a company that report in a country B, national evolution of the legal expense business are not always easy to analyse and interpret.

4 According to some estimates made by some of RIAD members, it is likely that the UK market has grown in 2011 by approximately 5%. However, given the lack of precise figures and the fact that some of this increase is reported in data of other countries, we have not been able to amend the data accordingly..

Figure 2 Correlation between the GDP real growth rate and the legal protection premium growth rate in 2011


6

5 The German inflation in 2011 was 2.5% compared to 3.1% in the EU 27 and 2.7% in the Euro Area 6 Please note that the market share of the United Kingdom is slightly underestimated as the data does not include the Lloyds market which

accounts for approximately 20% of the UK legal protection insurance market.7 As indicated above, the slowdown observed in the UK is likely to be related to the increase of the business written offshore.

The distribution of total premium income for 2011 (€7,432m) by country confirms the predominance of the German market which accounts for 45% of the European total. This high market share relates not only to the size of the market but also to a high penetration rate of the legal protection insurance in Germany. The two biggest subsequent markets are France and the Netherlands, which account for, respectively, 12% and 11% of the European legal protection market. The remaining

markets account for less than 10% of the European market (United Kingdom6 - 7%, Austria - 6%, Belgium - 5% and Switzerland 5%). Since 2008, the Dutch market has overtaken the United Kingdom which was previously the third biggest market. This evolution reflects the sharp slowdown in the premium income recorded in the United Kingdom over the last few years7. All other markets account for 5% or less of the European market.

recorded growth rates close to or above 10%. These double digit growth rates are explained by the fact that the legal protection insurance market in some of those countries is less developed and still in a catch-up phase following the economic growth for some of these countries. In the specific case of Luxembourg, the evolution of the legal protection market reflects also the influence of the increase in contract sold outside of the country. For Denmark, the size of the legal protection market is very small (less than 0.1% of all non-life premiums) and has still room for development.

In 2011, Europe’s leading market, Germany, recorded a growth rate of 2.6% compared to 1.3% in 2010 and only 0.1% in 2009. This level is similar to the inflation and therefore does not compensate for the very low growth rate observed over the two previous years. This level remains below the EU average growth rate observed over the last decade in the EU and seems to be characteristic of a very mature market with high competition among market players and very low inflation5. Other Western markets have also recorded growth rates above the EU average: Switzerland (7.8%), Finland (7.7%), Belgium (5.7%), France (5.6%), Italy (4.1%), Austria (3.7%) and the Netherland (3.6%).

Figure 3 Growth rate of premium income in Europe in 2010 and 2011


NB: For Denmark data relate to partial data

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%


7

Figure 4 Breakdown of legal protection premium income per country in 2011


Combined, the four leading markets (Germany, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom) account for 75% of the European market.


8

Legal protection insurance represents only a small fraction of the total non-life insurance market, accounting for less than 2% of the total non-life insurance premium income. The share of legal protection insurance in the non-life insurance market has varied between 1.5% and 1.8% during the period 2002-2011. Between 2002 and 2010, this share has constantly

increased, reaching its highest level in 2010 at 1.79%. For the first time over the last decade, the ratio has slightly decreased to 1.76%. This recent evolution reflects a higher growth rate in the total non-life market (3%) than in the legal protection market.

3. Share of legal protection insurance in non-life premium income

Figure 5 Share of legal protection insurance in total non-life insurance premium income


NB: Given the lack of data for the Netherlands over the period 2002-2006, this country is excluded from the graph for this time of period in order to ensure comparability.

Comparing non-life and legal protection insurance premium growth over the last decade clearly shows that, on average, the legal protection business has grown faster than the total non-life business with only one exception in 2011 [See figure 6].

At the country level, the data shows a lot of heterogeneity regarding the share of legal protection insurance in the total non-life business. The ratios vary widely, from less than 0.1% of premiums in Denmark, Hungary, Croatia and Island to more than 3% in Belgium, Germany, Austria and Luxembourg. The high level of the ratio observed in Luxembourg makes this country at the top of the ranking with a share of 5.3% in 2011 compared to 6.5% in 2010. This exceptional level is related to the large share of the sales out of the country (around 55% of

the premiums are sold out of the country). However, it should be noted that the rate tends to vary in Luxembourg more than in other countries due to change in sales out of the country and does not reflect specific change on the domestic market.

On average, the levels are lower in Eastern markets and higher in Western ones which tend to be more mature and where legal protection insurance is more developed as a result. On this basis, given the rapid economic growth observed in Eastern countries over the last decade, we can expect the legal protection insurance business to further develop in Eastern countries. However, the impact of the current economic crisis may slowdown this trend but the effective impact is currently only noticeable in some countries. Variations in Western

1,85%

1,80%

1,75%

1,70%

1,65%

1,60%

1,55%

1,50%

1,45%


9

Figure 6 Premium growth rate for non-life and legal protection insurance

NB: Given the lack of data for the Netherlands over the period 2002-2006, this country is excluded from the graph for this time of period in order to ensure comparability.

markets that have more-or-less the same degree of maturity seem to be more cultural in nature and may depend on various factors such as consumer habits, the development of public legal aid, the share of businesses taking out legal protection insurance, the level of lawyers’ fees, the extent to which the country promotes access to justice, risk aversion, the manner

in which procedural costs are shared between parties, etc. However, market practices may also explain some differences. For instance legal protection insurance policies sold as add-ons to other insurance covers (e.g. motor or home insurance) may be more widespread than if sold separately.

Figure 7 Share of legal protection insurance in the non-life insurance market in 2010 and 2011, per country


NB: Denmark is underrepresented due to partial data.

7.0%

5.5%

4.8%

1.5%

4.1%

2.6%

5.1%

3.8%

2.2%

5.0%

3.4%

1.9%

5.8%

3.2%

2.2%

2.9%

0,5%

3.8%

-0,6%

-4.5%

1.2%

1.6%

3.4%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

-2%

-4%

-6%

-2,1%

3,3%

3,0%

0,4%


10

4. Penetration rate

The ratio of legal protection insurance premium income to GDP (at market price), also known as the penetration rate, does not represent the contribution of the legal protection branch to GDP, but is rather an indicator of the relative importance of legal protection insurance in the various European markets. It allows comparisons between markets and across time.

On average, in 2011, the legal protection premiums represented 0.058% of the GDP compared to 0.059% in 2009 which is the highest level recorded over the last ten years. The strong increase in the ratio observed in 2009 does not reflect a strong increase in the legal protection insurance premium

but is rather an indicator of the economic recession observed in Europe (the EU 27 GDP (at market prices) decreased by 5.4% in 2009). However, in 2010 and 2011, the EU GDP grew at a faster rate (respectively 4.8% and 2.9% at market price) than the legal protection premiums income (3.3% and 1.2% respectively) explaining the slight drop in the ratio. Over the past decade the ratio increased significantly in 2002 when the EU27 GDP (at market prices) increased by a small 1.7% while at the same time the legal protection insurance premium income grew by 7.2%. It was next followed by a period (2003-2009) characterised by a rather stable, sometimes slightly declining, penetration ratio.

Figure 8 Penetration rate of legal protection insurance in Europe (2002-2011)


NB: Data from 2002 to 2006 does not include the Netherlands. Therefore, the jump in 2007 is due to the inclusion of the Netherlands where the penetration is above the average.


11

The data per country show very different levels of legal protection insurance development in Europe. The highest levels are recorded in the most advanced economies, specifically in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium,

Luxembourg and Switzerland. Lower levels are mainly found in Eastern countries (Croatia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Turkey). Very low levels are also observed in more developed markets such as Denmark, Malta or Island.

Figure 9 Penetration rate per country in 2010 and 2011


NB: Denmark is underrepresented due to partial data


12

5. Premium per capita

The premium per capita relates the total premium income of a country to the number of inhabitants in the country. It is important to stress that this does not represent the average premium paid by consumers as not everyone has legal protection cover and as a large part of legal protection insurance cover relates to businesses. In addition, for some countries (e.g. Luxembourg) premium income includes the business abroad which does not facilitate the comparison. However, for most markets, the ratio constitutes another

indicator of the relative development of legal protection insurance.

On average, the premium per capita amounted to €13.7 in 2011 compared to €13.5 in 2010 and €12.6 in 2007. This represents an average growth of 2.1% over the period 2007-2011 and of 1.3% in 2011. The evolution of the premium per capita closely follows changes to the total legal protection premium income.

Figure 10 Premium per capita in Europe (2002-2011)


NB Data from 2002 to 2006 does not include the Netherlands. Therefore, the jump in 2007 is due to the inclusion of the Netherlands where the penetration is above the average.


13

Figure 11 Premium per capita in European countries (in €) (2010 and 2011)


The analysis by country shows that premium per capita ranges from around €10 to more than €50 in most Western countries. Luxembourg reaches a record of 80€ which cannot be compared to other countries as it includes a high proportion of business underwritten abroad. The high level observed in Austria, the Netherlands and Germany may be explained by a high proportion of standalone products and the high penetration rate of legal protection insurance for undertakings. Switzerland is also characterised by a high level of premium per inhabitant (€45 in 2011 compared to €37 in 2010) which may be explained on the one hand by its position as international financial centre and on the other hand by the

high living standards in the country which press people to better protect themselves against legal risks.

Southern European countries (Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Slovenia) show lower levels between €1 and €5 per inhabitant while most Eastern countries record less than €1 premium income per inhabitant. Here again, the continued economic development of Eastern countries is likely to decrease this heterogeneity and to harmonise levels as convergence between Eastern and Western Europe increases but this trend might take a lot of time especially in the context of the current economic crisis.


14

8 Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal.

6. Elements of the technical account

6.1 Claims paid and change in provisions

The total claims paid by legal protection insurers, based on a sample of 11 European countries8 accounting for approximately 79% of the total legal protection market in Europe, amounted to €3,509m in 2011 compared to €3,492 in 2010 and €3,521m in 2009. The total amount of claims paid in 2011 is almost the same as the one recorded in 2010 and

slightly lower than the one observed in 2009. The level of claims paid by legal protection insurers has increased sharply in 2009 with a jump of 9% compared to 2008. This sharp increase in total claims paid by legal protection insurers might find its origin in the economic crisis and in a related increase in the number of legal proceedings by companies as a result of the increasing number of bankruptcies and payment defaults.

Figure 12 Claims paid by legal protection insurers in Europe

Source: National associations and supervisors (see section 1.2)

NB: Data based on a sample of countries accounting for 79% of the European market

9,1%

1,3%

-1,3%

0,0%


15

The evolution of the claims paid by legal protection insurers mainly reflects the evolution of the leading German market which accounts for two third of the total claims paid at the EU level. However, national markets show very different patterns. The sharpest increases (above 10%) are recorded in countries like Portugal and Poland while the strongest decrease is recorded in Estonia. Strong variations in such countries, where the market is not yet highly developed and where the amount paid remains relatively small compared to more mature market as in Germany or in the Netherlands, are very frequent

and may find their explanation in the realisation of larger risks inducing large claims or increase in provision that may influence the national market. Most more mature markets show much lower variations: +8% in the Netherlands, +4% in Switzerland, +2% in Spain and Greece, -5% in Belgium, -8% in Italy and -10% in Austria. All in all, the increases recorded in some countries are compensated by the decreases in some others and explain the flat evolution of the total claims paid in the European market between 2010 and 2011.

9 Since data for Estonia was only partially available they are included in figure 13 but not in figure 12.

Figure 13 Growth rate in legal protection claim expenditure in European countries9 (2010 and 2011)


140%

90%

40%

-10%

-60%


16

10 Please note that the loss ratios presented in this edition may vary significantly from those presented last year due to changes in the sample. Due to lack of data for 2009, the United Kingdom is not included.

11 At current exchange rate.12 The same as shown in figure 12: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Estonia, Spain, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland and

Portugal.

The loss ratio10, which relates claims paid to the premiums received amounted to 59.7% in 2011 compared to 61.8% in 2010 and 64.3% in 2009. After a jump of 4 points in 2009, reflecting a greater increase in claims paid (9.2%) than in

premium income (2.4%), the loss ratio came down gradually closer to its historical level following a small decrease in claims paid (-1.3% in 2010 and -0.05% in 2011) and a slight increase in the premium income (+ 3.2% in 2010 and +4% in 201111).

Figure 14 Evolution of loss ratios in Europe (2007-2011)


NB: European loss ratio calculated for a sample of 11 European countries accounting for 79% of the European legal protection insurance market 12


17

The loss ratio per country shows a high level of heterogeneity across Europe. The highest levels are recorded in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands that all have loss ratio above 50% and that are all mature markets for legal protection insurance. The lowest levels are recorded in Southern and Eastern countries (Italy, Portugal, Greece, Poland) where the legal protection market is less developed. In those countries where the legal protection insurance is still in the process of development, the loss ratio tends to be lower as the premium tends to reflect long-term risk while these risks are only likely

to occur in the future. In Poland, the low level of the loss ratio compensates the high level of administrative and acquisition costs that are typical of markets experiencing a strong rise in new business.

The data also shows that the average decrease of 2% in the loss ratio recorded in 2011 is more or less generalised in mature markets: all of them with the exception of the Netherlands record a lower loss ratio in 2011 than in 2010.

Figure 15 Loss ratios in selected European countries (2010 and 2011)


80,0%

70,0%

60,0%

50,0%

40,0%

30,0%

20,0%

10,0%

0,0%


18

13 Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal.

6.2 Operating expenses

Operating expenses, which encompass both administrative expenses and acquisition costs (i.e. commissions to intermediaries or distribution costs) are only available for 8 countries13 that account for 68% of the total premium income. In 2011, operating expenses amounted to €1,543m compared to €1,502m the year before. This represents a jump of 2.8% at constant exchange rate and follows a strong increase of 12.4% recorded in 2010 (at constant exchange rates). The strong

jump recorded in 2010 is mainly explained by the German market which accounts for more than 60% of the sample and that recorded a jump of 17% in operating expenses. However, a higher than usual growth in operating expenses in 2010 was not specific to the German market and was observed in most markets. This above the inflation adjustment in operating expenses may find its origin in the crisis and in the increase of claims that could lead to higher administrative expenses as well as in acquisition costs that may increase when competition to reach new policyholders rises.

Figure 16 Operating expenses in Europe (2007-2011)


NB: Data calculated for a sample of countries accounting for 68% of the European legal protection insurance market

-4%

1%

12%

3%


19

Figure 17 Growth rate in operating expenses in selected countries (2010 and 2011)

The expense ratio - relating operating expenses to premium income - calculated for a sample of 8 countries that account for 68% of the market14 reached 30.7% in 2011 which is a level

comparable to 2010 but almost three points higher than the level of 2009 which was the lowest over the last five years. The 2011 level is close to the one recorded in 2007 before the crisis.

Figure 18 Expense ratio for a sample of 8 countries (2007-2011)

14 Please see previous footnote.

120,0%

100,0%

80,0%

60,0%

40,0%

20,0%

0,0%

-20,0%

-40,0%

31,5%

31,0%

30,5%

30,0%

29,5%

29,0%

28,5%

28,0%

27,5%

27,0%

26,5%

30,2%

28,4%

28,1%

30,8%30,7%


20

15 It has also to be mentioned that methodology may differ slightly from country-to-country regarding the allocation between operating costs and claims paid. These differences may decrease the comparability of the data, with the exception of the combined ratio.

At national levels, the expense ratio varies between 20% and more than 100% in the 10 countries for which data is available but shows a relatively steady negative growth rate between 2010 and 2011 in most countries15. The wide differences in the levels of the expense ratio between countries find their origin in several factors:- The distribution channels chosen by consumers buying

legal protection insurance may vary significantly from country-to-country according to the level of service required by the consumer. For instance, a contract bought through the internet might be cheaper to distribute than a contract distributed through a more traditional channel, such as a broker. However, it should also be noted that the premium might be slightly lower for a contract sold over the internet compared to a contract sold by a more expensive channel.

- Management costs vary significantly from company-

to-company according to the way claims and contracts are managed. Some companies manage their contracts internally while others have recourse to external management, which may entail different levels of cost.

- Given that legal protection insurance covers households and businesses, the relative importance of the two respective types of demand could influence legal protection insurers’ cost structures and may partly explain differences in operating expenses.

- Finally, for the specific case of Eastern countries (Poland and Estonia in our sample), the very high expense ratio is mainly due to high acquisition costs that are typical in newly developed markets where insurers need to provide high remuneration levels to brokers and other distribution channels in order to give them an incentive to promote a relatively unknown product and to acquire rapidly a sufficiently large portfolio to optimally spread the risk.

Figure 19 Expense ratios in selected European countries in 2010 and 2011


100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%


21

6.3 Combined ratio

The combined ratio encompasses both the expense ratio and the loss ratio to reflect the technical profitability of the legal protection insurance business. The data, available for a sample of 9 countries16 that account for 68% of the European market, shows an average combined ratio of 92.2% in 2011 compared to 93.9% in 2010 and 94.2% in 2009. The combined ratio has therefore decreased in 2011 to come back closer to (but

still above) its level of 2008. This evolution is mainly due to a slight increase in premiums observed in 2011 while the claims paid remained stable and operating expenses increased by less than 3%. This evolution allows also legal protection insurers to compensate the decrease in the return of their portfolio investment that is affected by the low interest rate environment (for secure investments). The income of these investments generally allows insurers to subsidy their pure insurance business and to lower premium.

Figure 20 European combined ratios (2007-2011) based on a sample of 9 countries


NB: The nine sample countries account for 68% of the European legal protection insurance market.

16 Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal.

The combined ratio for each individual country is considerably more diversified. The highest levels are observed in Estonia, Poland and Belgium where, on average, the ratio was above

100% over the last few years. The high levels in Estonia and Poland is almost exclusively due to acquisition costs (see section 6.2).

95,0%

94,0%

93,0%

92,0%

91,0%

90,0%

89,0%

88,0%

87,0%

86,0%

85,0%


22

17 It has to be stressed that the creation of additional and stricter obligations for insurers, such as insurance guarantee schemes would create additional costs for legal protection insurers that would likely be passed on to consumers.

The low level of the combined ratio observed in some countries may find its origin in several factors:- Firstly, the legal protection market is a long-tail business

where claims may be notified several years after the underwriting of a contract and large parts of the claims are very often paid several years after the notification. As a consequence, it requires the constitution of technical provisions which may be difficult to estimate. This difficulty creates a risk which needs to be included in the premium income and which therefore lowers the combined ratio.

- Secondly, judicial outcomes and costs are subject to a high degree of uncertainty. Indeed, the fees to be paid to lawyers and legal indemnities are highly unpredictable. This uncertainty requires that insurers include a security margin in the premium.

- Thirdly, whereas motor and household legal protection insurance claims are not characterised by uncertainty, legal protection cover for undertakings is characterised by very heterogeneous average claims which do not facilitate risk rating and legal protection insurers also take account of this.

- Fourthly, the interest rate on secure assets have decreased significantly and reduced therefore insurers’ return on investment, which has generally tended to subsidise premium rates. Such an evolution requiring some premium adjustment.

- Fifthly, because legal protection insurance cover is often underwritten as an add-on to another insurance policy, methodological problems may arise. For instance in a motor accident claim, it can be difficult to disentangle the share of a loss related to the various covers included in the policies (legal protection, motor own damage, motor liability, etc). In some cases, the loss related to legal costs may be totally included in the losses of another business line.

- Finally, legal protection insurers, like all insurers, are preparing for the introduction of the Solvency II Directive regarding capital requirement17. This Directive is likely to increase the capital requirements and will have an increased focus on insurer’s risk management. Given the nature of the risks faced by legal protection insurers, the high degree of uncertainty and the long-tail characteristic of this business, legal protection insurers have been preparing to ready their businesses for the stricter requirements of the new Directive, that is expected to enter into force on 1 January 2016. In addition, the current economic crisis is raising uncertainty for all financial companies, despite banks and insurers’ very different operating models. This extra pressure on all financial undertakings requires regular upgrading of capital which also entails a cost for customers.

Figure 21 Combined ratios for selected European countries

Source: National associations and supervisors (see section 1.2) - For France data is only available for 2008

160,0%

140,0%

120,0%

100,0%

80,0%

60,0%

40,0%

20,0%

0,0%


23

7. Legal Protection Insurance in the context of the financial crisis

Legal protection insurance is a long-tail business that requires legal protection insurers to invest massively in assets in order to cover their commitments to policyholders. Insurers generally invest in assets with well defined cash flows and risk profiles and largely limit the risk profile of their investments in line with their commitments to policyholders. In 2011 the total investments of insurers amounted to more than €7,700bn invested in company shares, bonds and other assets. In general, insurance companies report a fairly diversified sovereign bond portfolio across EEA countries, Japan, Switzerland and the United States. The largest part of the portfolio is invested in bonds, i.e. 41% in debt securities and other fixed-income securities (Source Insurance Europe - Key Facts).

Along the year 2012 and especially in the first semester, legal protection insurer as well as all other institutional investors have had to work in a very difficult economic environment marked by the aggravation of the sovereign-debt crisis in the first half of the year, rising market concerns about the long-term viability of the euro area and negative feedbacks between banks’ funding pressures and economic activity, and to a lesser extent the unexpected slowdown in the economic activity growth outside the EU and global trade.

Actions taken by both policy makers and monetary authorities, mainly in the second part of 2012, have gradually reduced tail risks and relieved market stress: - In June 2012, the European Council has decided to engage

on the path toward a Banking Union and suggested the possibility for the EFSF/ESM to directly recapitalise credit institution.

- In September 2012 the ECB introduced the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) contributed decisively to removing doubts about the integrity and viability of the euro area.

- In October, the European Council agreed on a timetable to advance further on the deepening of EMU in four main areas (financial, budgetary, economic, and political).

The high uncertainty in financial markets including volatility and market fragmentation has made the investment strategy for insurers more complex and sensitive leading them to (i) intensify the credit assessment of counterparties; (ii) reduce the exposures, in particular to market and liquidity risks, (iii) revise their diversification policies by reducing concentration risk, (iv) reduce expenses by increasing the efficiency of resources and operations management and by applying cost-cutting programmes which downsized administrative, structural and

operational expenses and (v) intensify their business by selling bundled or supplementary contracts to those offered.

In particular, the sovereign debt crisis has led to a situation of polarised yield within the bond euro area market with on the one side extremely low yields for safe assets (German bonds have recorded extreme low interest rate with negative rate for two years maturity bonds) and extremely high yield for risky assets (including bonds issued by countries under program assistance). In 2013, on the back of better financial market conditions related to actions taken by authorities and central banks, the markets have been marked by a decrease in interest rates of stressed European countries that led several countries like Spain, Italy and Ireland to issue bonds on the market. These issuances have offered an attractive prospect for insurers facing low and even negative returns on governments’ debt from higher rated countries. The specific segment of bonds issued by triple A rated countries has effectively considerably shrunken since the beginning of the financial crisis leading to historically low yields amid a context of lower supply and continued search for safety and liquidity.

Nevertheless, as a result of the weak macroeconomic environment, interest rates in Western Europe have reached historic lows in the first half of 2013 constituting thereby a major challenge for most insurers and particularly for those involved in long-term business.

Generally, yield of most safe assets were particularly low and very often below the inflation interest rate reducing return on investment for insurers and making it more difficult for insurers to cover their commitment to policyholders. Such an evolution is pushing insurers to increase the diversity of their investment portfolio and searching for higher yield assets that may also appear to be riskier. All in all, up to now, most insurers have managed to find an appropriate balance between security and sufficient high yielding assets. However, a prolonged period of low interest rates could force some insurers to strengthen further their balance sheet in order to better resist to such exceptional circumstances and to be ready to cope with eventual other external shocks. Nevertheless, not all lines of business are affected in the same way. Short-term business can be re-priced thereby making its sensitivity to interest rate fluctuations marginal. By contrast, interest rates may have a huge impact on long-term lines of business where investment income is a major source of earnings. However, the interest rate risk inherent to long-tail lines of non-life business such as the legal protection insurance can be dealt with by

prudent management of assets and liabilities, although long-tail business remains vulnerable to unexpected increases in claim inflation. Finally, saving life insurance products are the most exposed to interest rate risks as investment income is the key source of profit and policyholder behaviour can foil insurers’ hedging strategies18.

With regard to the liquidity risk, it should be noted that, in contrast to other financial services providers, insurers are characterised by the inversion of their cost/revenue cycles. This means that insurers are primarily funded by policyholders’ premiums, making them less exposed to liquidity risk and to any problems accessing credit markets.

In the first half of 2013, on the back of the strong policy actions taken since the beginning of the crisis, conditions in the financial markets have improved contributing to increased confidence and greater resilience. Owing to increased investor confidence, financial conditions for stressed sovereign and corporate credit markets have improved considerably while the equity market recorded a significant surge.

However, in the context of the recessionary pressure in a number of economies in the EU combined with the rising unemployment and a prolonged period of subdued growth could have negative effects on insurance demand in particular those that may be considered by customers as less essential.

This impact could be further amplified by the slowdown in growth in other world regions thereby affecting insurers by a lower global demand and by their subsidiaries abroad.

With regard to the risk outlook, volatility in government and corporate bond markets could have an impact on balance sheet valuations while in the medium term a prolonged period of low-yield environment could affect insurers’ income profile and necessitate further adjustment in their balance sheet. The outlook, however, bears a high degree of heterogeneity across individual institutions and euro area countries, in line with the geographical fragmentation of markets. Low yields on highly rated government bonds and subdued economic activity continue to put pressure on profitability. As regards solvency, volatility in government bond prices could impact balance sheet valuations and thus capital, the direction of the impact depending on the liability valuation rules of the jurisdiction. The low-yield environment may also push insurers towards more lucrative non-core activities. The negative rating outlooks generated by the low-yield environment, on the one hand, and sovereign risk in Europe, on the other, are making capital raising an increasingly expensive option for the insurance sector. Many insurers are therefore paying increasing attention to earnings retention, also with a view to the potentially higher future capital needs that will result from the forthcoming introduction of the risk-based requirements of the Solvency II framework.


18 See Swiss Re Sigma N°4/2012 “Facing the interest rate challenge”

24


8. Link between the development of the judicial system and legal protection insurance

The development of legal protection insurance is intrinsically related to the development of the judicial system and the overall legal environment. Changes to citizens’ and under-takings’ habits regarding recourse to the judicial system and changes to the understanding of their rights are likely to in-fluence the demand for legal protection insurance, as well as

alter the insurance risk profile. The development of new laws and new rules at national, European and even international level continuously change the organisation of the judicial sys-tem and therefore the environment in which legal protection insurers and their clients operate.

8.1 Number of court cases

Despite the lack of statistics regarding the judicial system, some indicators show that recourse to the courts at various levels has increased over time, at least in some fields. Data from France, Germany and Spain show an increase in civil cases for France and Spain at least up to 2010 while the number of criminal cases, which represent a small share of total cases,

has slightly decreased over the same period. It should also be noted that the number of legal cases represents only part of the number of disputes officially settled, as there exist Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms that are also supported by legal protection insurers. ADR mechanisms offer a flexible, cost-effective and fast settlement procedure that allows for an efficient resolution of conflict for both consumers and insurers (see section 8.5).

2000 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

FRANCE19

Civil and Commercial courts

2 358 300 2 575 100 2 642 800 2 674 700 2 654 200

Criminal courts 1 361 200 1 233 300 1 193 100 1 173 200 1 180 600

GERMANY20

Social courts21 308 160 387 791 422 214

Civil courts22 1 612 643 1 585 243 1 572 363

Criminal courts 817 681 790 535 784 699

SPAIN23

Civil courts 931 029 1 003 121 1 157 422 1 157 602 1 107 179

8.2 The number of lawyers

The increased number of lawyers also indicates a greater use of the legal system to resolve disputes. This growing scale of

the judicial environment is a likely explanation for the rising costs associated with the legal system. According to data from the CCBE24, the number of lawyers has increased on average by approximately 3% a year over the period 2007-2011.

19 Data relates to decision made by the courts. Source: www.insee.fr20 Source: www.destatis.de21 Complaints filed with social courts (all types included)22 New proceedings23 Number of admitted civil cases. Source www.ine.es24 Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe

25

Figure 22 Number of court cases in selected European countries

8.3 The legal aid

In order to facilitate access to the judicial system, states have developed a system of legal aid both in criminal law and civil law fields. The rules and specificities of these legal aid systems may also influence the development of legal protection insurance across Europe. According to the data collected by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (Council of Europe), in Europe, legal aid25 represents on average almost 12% of the total budget allocated to all courts, public prosecution and legal aid. However, this average encompasses a wide range of situations. Indeed, while this figure amounts to more than 15% in most northern European

states (Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Ireland, Iceland, UK, Norway) and up to 56.5% in England and Wales, this figure is much lower (below 3%) in most eastern countries.

Differences appear also in the law field covered by the legal systems: in central and eastern European states, legal aid generally focuses on the criminal law field (Romania, Latvia, Bulgaria, Russian Federation, Turkey, Czech Republic) while in the north of Europe (UK-England and Wales, Iceland, Denmark, Norway) the allocation of legal aid seems to be more balanced between criminal law and civil law. Germany, France, Switzerland, and the Netherlands show legal aid systems favouring civil law cases.


Figure 23 Evolution of the number of lawyers in European bar associations

(Source CCBE – www.ccbe.eu)

NB: As some data was missing for some countries for some years, estimate were use based on mean and average growth rates.

25 Legal aid is understood here in a broad sense, including also, for example, the costs of legal aid structures, information policies of court users or mechanisms to support the parties in the proceedings for preventing trials.

26

2,5%

4,3%

2,8%

2,5%


Figure 24 Share of legal aid in total public budget allocated to all courts, public prosecution and legal aid

Source: Council of Europe - The European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice - Evaluation report on European judicial systems - 2012

The number of cases granted with legal aid per 100,000 inhabitants varies considerably from country to country with more than 3,500 cases per 100,000 inhabitants in the

Netherlands compared to less than hundred in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Azerbaijan, Hungary or Moldova.

Figure 25 Number of cases granted with legal aid per 100,000 inhabitants


27

60,0%

50,0%

40,0%

30,0%

20,0%

10,0%

0,0%

The average amount of legal aid allocated is 625€ per case but amounts to more than 3,500€ in England and Wales and less than 50€ in Hungary and Moldova. Northern European countries are clearly the most generous but it can be noted that Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina show average levels higher than the average and comparable to many northern countries. Those differences among states reflect differences in wealth and need to be compared to the number of cases that are submitted every year. Comparing the average amount of legal aid to the average premium of legal protection insurance per inhabitant shows that the low level of average premium per inhabitant observed in the UK or in Finland may be due to the high level of legal aid in those countries. On the contrary, the high development of legal protection in countries like

Austria or Germany may also find, up to a certain extent, its origin in the lower development of the legal aid. However, this negative relation between legal aid and legal protection insurance is not observed in all countries. In the Netherlands, for instance, both are well developed. This may be explained by the high share of contracts in legal protection insurance subscribed by enterprises rather than by households. It is also worth noting that in some countries (Denmark, Finland, France, Lithuania, and Sweden) public legal aid is not granted when the insurance covers court fees or only takes into account the part not covered by the insurance. Such legal provisions may hinder the development of legal protection insurance.


Figure 26 Average amount of legal aid allocated per case


Conditions for granting legal aid vary also from country to country. These conditions depend on the financial situation of the applicant concerned and/or on the merits of the case. The coverage of legal aid varies also from country to country with regard to the law field but also the type of costs covered.

Additional costs such as fees of technical advisors or experts, private detectives, travel costs, notaries’ costs, mediators etc. may or may not be covered according to the national legislation.

28


26 France has chosen to abandon the system of free access to courts as from 2011.

8.4 Court fees and reimbursement

In almost all states, parties have to pay court taxes or fees to initiate criminal or non-criminal law proceedings. Only France26 and Luxembourg provide a free access to all courts. However,

the level and the share of these court fees (or taxes) in the court budget varies significantly from country to country. It represents less than 10% in Hungary, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Sweden but more than 50% in Serbia, Malta or Bulgaria. On average these fees represent 28% of the court budget.

Figure 27 Share of court fees (or taxes) in the court budget


8.5 Alternative Dispute Resolution

The use of Alternative Dispute Resolution is growing in many Member States and constitutes a way to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the justice which is supported by legal protection insurers and which therefore may impact their costs and the premium level. Alternative Dispute Resolution can take three main forms: mediation, conciliation or arbitration.

The recourse to such Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms is illustrated among other by the number of

accredited mediators which is elevated in countries like the Netherlands and Austria but also in some central and eastern European countries such as Hungary, Romania or Slovakia. In most countries, the number of accredited mediator has increased between 2006 and 2010, demonstrating the rising success of Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms.

Most European countries allow also legal aid for mediation procedures with the exception of Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Latvia, Greece and Austria.

29


Figure 28 Number of accredited mediators in 2006, 2008 and 2010


8.6 Other factors

The increase in the number of laws and rules at all institutional levels (communal, regional, national, European and international) without observing a corresponding streamlining of existing laws, fortifies the consumer perception that the legal system is more and more complex and less transparent. The increasing complexity of the judicial system mostly reflects rising complexity in society. However, this rise in the perceived complexity of the legal system may also contribute to a rise in the demand for legal protection insurance.

Finally, it should be noted that national legal developments as well as EU encouragement of the use of collective redress instruments are likely to have an influence on the business of

legal protection insurance. Greater use of collective redress claims and procedures are likely to increase claim frequency, increase serial losses and as a result the risk to be covered. Such developments will, on the one hand, foster demand for legal protection insurance but, on the other hand, create much more uncertainty for insurers, potentially leading to higher premium rates, which could then inhibit demand for coverage. The net impact is still unknown but is likely to increase volatility in losses (due to the strong variation collective action could create in lawyers’ fees and other legal costs) and increase the market risk (by increasing the number of court cases, especially the number of very small cases that would not have been pursued without collective redress schemes). Furthermore, increases in premium rates create an additional risk of adverse selection27.

30

27 The risk of adverse selection refers to a situation where an individual’s demand for insurance (or propensity to buy insurance) is positively correlated with the individual risk of loss. The insurer being unable to differentiate individuals with high and low risk profiles, may request a premium that exceeds the willingness to pay of the low risk profiles and therefore attract exclusively high risk profiles.


9. Service provision and legal aspects of legal protection insurance

Legal protection insurance not only gives the policyholder the possibility of being reimbursed for lawyer fees and other costs related to a court case. Legal protection insurers have broade-ned their service offering by extending their activities to rela-ted services such as the provision of legal advice by lawyers employed by the insurance company or by external lawyers. The legal protection insurer may also support the client with out-of-court settlements or directly represent the policyhol-der in courts or administrative proceedings.

However, all these external services are strictly regulated by national law. From a general point of view, legal advice and

the settlement of claims out-of-court can be provided without legal restriction. However the representation of the policyhol-der in courts and/or administrative proceeding is generally forbidden or submitted to legal restrictions which vary from country-to-country.

The restrictions are the strongest in Germany where legal pro-tection insurers are only allowed to pay claims and are not en-titled to give any legal advice or to settle claims out-of-court. Hence, representation in court or administrative proceedings is also forbidden. The provision of legal advice by insurers is also forbidden in Poland.

Figure 29 Services provided by legal protection insurers and legal restrictions in European countries

Country Legal adviceOut-of-court

settlement of claims

Representation in court or administrative

proceedings

AT 1)

BE 2)

CH 3)

CZ 4)

DE 5)

ES 6) 7) 8)

FR 9)

GR 10)

HU 11)

IE

IT 12)

LU 13)

NL 14)

PL 15) 16)

SK 17)

UK 18)

Insurers are allowed to provide this service without any legal restrictions.

Insurers can provide this service but are subjected to some legal restrictions.

It is forbidden for insurers to provide this kind of service.

31


32

AT 1) Representation in civil court is not part of the exclusive tasks of a lawyer and can be provided by legal protection insurers in the following cases:Non-lawyers can represent clients in the Arbeiterkammer (Austrian Chamber of Labour) in labour and contract proceedings and can also represent clients of the Jugendwohlfahrtsträger (the institute for youth welfare) when defending youths with maintenance claims or with parental disputes).Non-lawyers can represent clients when the litigation value is under €4,000 and can provide conveyancing services (e.g. transfer of property), jurists with a law degree and specialisation (such as a notary) can represent individuals and SMEs.

BE 2) Representation in civil court is not part of the exclusive tasks of a lawyer in the following cases: in labour cases clients can be defended by a union representative. Government officials can represent the government in tax cases. In conveyancing services (e.g. transfer of property) anybody can represent individuals and SMEs. Insurers are prohibited from providing these services.

CH 3) Administrative proceedings (out-of-court): representation by specialists or by the client himself is allowed (e.g. transfer of property).Administrative proceeding (in court): this is not reserved for lawyers (due to inclusive social law).Civil cases (in court): in most cases, representation by legal protection insurers is not allowed, but there are a few exceptions in domains such as labour law. Since 2011 a new unique procedural law is applicable in all of Switzerland and replace the former 26 different civil procedural laws. Penal cases: strictly reserved for lawyers.

CZ 4) Representation in-court for civil cases is in principle not obligatory; a person or SME can represent themselves. Similarly for conveyancing services, a person/SME with the legal problem can also represent themselves.It is possible to be represented by a third person, but not repeatedly by the same person.

DE 5) People cannot be represented by professionals other than lawyers. Only in certain civil cases can people represent them-selves. For the rest, lawyers have the exclusive right to conduct legal proceedings in all cases that are handled in-court.

ES 6) Legal advice can only be provided by persons with a law degree who are not a member of the bar association; a legal expert/lawyer can be employed by an insurer (it does not matter if he is a member of the bar or not).

7) If the insured person gives his consent, anyone from the legal protection insurer can negotiate an out-of-court settlement.

8) As a general rule, in order to appear before a court in Spain, one needs to use a Procurador (procurator) for representation and an Abogado (lawyer) to conduct the case before the court. One can act without these professionals only when the dispute involves an amount of less than €900. It is not possible to be represented by a non-lawyer but the lawyer can be an employee of an insurance company.

FR 9) The basic principle is an exclusive right for lawyers to assist and represent parties, bidding and pleading before any judicial or administrative jurisdiction (the court), but there is a very narrow exception to this rule where a party can be represented by others: non-jurists (e.g. consumer representative bodies, trade union or other family member), or a bailiff (before the commer-cial court).

GR 10) Legal advice can only be provided by lawyers who are employed by the legal protection insurer and not by ordinary employees.

HU 11) The insurer’s in-house legal experts can give legal advice to clients, and represent them in-court or in out-of-court settle-ments in cases that fall within the scope of the policy. Criminal law cases, however, including misdemeanours, must always be represented by an independent attorney-at-law.

IT 12) Representation is only possible by lawyers. Representation is not mandatory in civil cases with an interest below €516.46.

LU 13) Legal protection insurers are permitted to analyse legal issues in detail when handling a claim, so as to evaluate the prospects of success and, thus, give legal advice. Besides that, insurers are allowed to try to settle insureds’ claims out-of-court before mandating a lawyer.

NL 14) Representation in civil court is not part of the exclusive tasks of a lawyer and can be provided by a legal protection insurer in the following cases: labour disputes, disputes related to renting or hiring and hire purchase, social security disputes, disputes with governing bodies and all other cases with a financial value not exceeding €25,000.

PL 15) The insurer can provide out-of-court settlements in such cases where asserting an entitlement falls within the scope of the policy. Collecting claims is defined by insurance law as a task of an insurer.

16) Parties can be represented by a person from a trade union. In administrative cases only natural persons with full legal capacity can represent clients. Clients are obliged to be represented by a solicitor or advocate (barrister) in proceedings before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court.

SK 17) Everyone can represent themselves in civil court; in such cases an insurance (in-house) legal expert can also represent the party. However, this third person cannot represent the party repeatedly as professional legal representation is reserved to lawyers. In criminal or delinquency legal cases and at the criminal court only registered lawyers can represent in-court.

UK 18) Everyone has the right to represent themselves in court; legal representation is not a requirement. Any suitable person, inclu-ding legal protection insurers, approved by the court can represent someone else; although it is very unlikely that the court would allow an unqualified employee of the insurer to represent a person in court and solicitors employed by an insurer are precluded by their regulator (the SRA) from representing people in court. Representation in civil court is not part of the exclusive tasks of a lawyer and can be provided by legal protection insurers: in Employment Tribunals, in some cases anybody, including a layperson as a ‘litigation friend’ can represent; otherwise generally only lawyers.


33

ANNEXES : Data used in the publication

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 6.998 7.424 7.809 8.171 8.406 8.668 8.852 8.999 9.191 9.464

BE 7.873 8.250 8.526 8.655 9.107 9.535 9.926 10.068 10.341 10.635

BG 199 258 333 401 548 655 787 747 706 694

CH 12.539 12.753 13.232 13.428 13.504 12.655 14.880 16.024 18.068 20.517

CY 194 261 283 320 352 392 432 462 468 463

CZ 1.840 1.994 2.113 2.391 2.642 2.758 3.233 3.086 3.224 3.273

DE 75.706 79.155 81.823 82.740 83.490 83.955 84.948 86.169 88.489 91.282

DK 4.513 4.858 5.372 5.391 5.646 5.760 5.955 6.032 5.979 6.495

EE 110 131 151 173 200 254 245 233 217 217

ES 21.530 22.832 25.888 27.775 29.495 31.056 31.777 32.063 29.008 29.819

FI 2.567 2.659 2.834 3.046 3.136 3.129 3.264 3.328 3.409 3.610

FR 46.498 50.006 52.885 55.216 56.889 58.652 60.826 61.717 63.420 65.537

GR 1.585 1.800 1.895 1.988 2.060 2.492 2.596 2.874 2.930 2.730

HR 597 623 675 737 821 897 988 943 931 903

HU 1.202 1.321 1.412 1.550 1.550 1.678 1.706 1.496 1.457 1.365

IE 3.955 4.240 4.068 3.841 3.823 3.610 3.334 3.124 3.036 2.880

IS 268 266 251 311 318 369 258 221 245 257

IT 32.414 34.213 35.411 36.309 37.125 37.656 37.454 36.686 35.606 36.358

LI n.a. n.a. n.a. 116 140 173 235 352 407 395

LU 439 461 465 523 545 584 534 537 570 778

LV 172 187 187 204 267 401 449 287 232 157

MT 99 104 108 116 115 124 93 91 100 98

NL 20.097 21.605 23.574 23.695 47.871 48.515 52.066 53.266 56.292 56.841

NO 3.963 4.165 4.097 4.407 4.502 4.594 4.738 4.706 5.402 5.972

PL 3.437 3.108 3.313 3.908 4.213 4.837 5.724 4.866 5.692 6.021

PT 3.852 4.044 4.222 4.308 4.361 4.382 4.321 4.132 4.168 4.133

RO 323 392 477 655 1.024 1.569 1.933 1.576 1.576 1.435

SE 5.215 6.761 6.782 7.326 7.627 7.378 7.287 5.280 6.230 6.202

SI 917 970 1.028 1.082 1.185 1.285 1.377 1.440 1.438 1.444

SK 483 598 713 738 759 861 965 965 868 870

TR 2.060 2.330 3.036 3.998 4.574 5.374 5.222 4.842 5.967 5.953

UK 68.602 70.307 69.511 72.512 71.352 71.209 61.254 56.090 61.188 63.876

1. Data used in sections 2 to 5

Non-life premium income (Gross written premium) – Source: Insurance Europe- In millions Euros


34

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 301 314 326 344 361 376 392 414 429 445

BE 247 261 276 287 300 313 326 346 368 389

BG n.a. n.a. 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

CH 170 177 181 192 204 213 227 255 295 356

CY n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

CZ 5 5 6 7 8 9 11 11 12 14

DE 2.727 2.827 2.924 3.014 3.066 3.158 3.204 3.206 3.248 3.331

DK 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 7 8

EE n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 0 1

ES 84 89 93 117 136 145 128 126 171 123

FI 36 39 40 44 47 51 55 59 65 70

FR 457 515 543 558 603 666 721 815 871 920

GR 21 25 30 37 39 51 57 55 55 48

HR n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 1 1 0 0

HU 0 1 2 2 3 4 1 1 1 1

IE n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

IS n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0

IT 164 184 205 228 253 278 286 296 289 301

LI n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

LU 11 12 12 13,125 14,268 15,686 18,542 21,788 37,112 41,051

LV n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0,2 n.a.

MT n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0

NL n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 639 676 714 771 800

NO n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

PL 1 2 2 3 4 9 21 22 60 41

PT 5 9 10 12 10 14 12 9 14 16

RO n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

SE n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

SI 0 0 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 4

SK 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 n.a. n.a.

TR 2 3 11 13 15 22 17 17 22 22

UK 406 465 558 620 708 777 682 654 599 502

Legal protection insurance premium income (Gross written premiums) – Source Insurance Europe – In millions Euros

Source for Poland and Luxembourg: National supervisor (see section 1.2)


35

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2008 2009

AT 182 193 186 183 218 260 234

BE 154,828 156,89 173,415 133,0103 176,8736 170,0211 161,8371

CH 125 131 126 129 159 155 181

DE 2229 2215 2223 2276 2410 2336 2338

EE 0,106348983 0,103281224 0,192821444 0,086

ES 27,29451133 31,50798512 32,30454126 35,72761732 24,0011792 29,33893787 29,84932009

FR 425,35

UK 134 125 121 78

GR 3,7 3,861 4,641 4,674 6,82 6,325 6,4821

IT 67 76 94 96 115 122 113

LU 7,21 6,64 11,65 9,35 8,137 13,118 10,047

NL 322 354 398 397 429

PL 0,7 0,6 1,3 1,9 1,6 2,2 2,3

PT 1,6 2,2 2,8 2,9 2,9 1,2 3,0

2. Data related to legal protection insurance as used in section 6

Legal protection insurance claims expenditure (in millions €) – (Sources: See section 1.2)

Legal protection insurance premium income (in millions €) – (Sources: See section 1.2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 344 361 376 392 414 429 445

BE 287,1 300,4 313 325,4 343,8 365,9 385,5

CH 192 204 206 228 255 295 356

DE 3014 3066 3158 3204 3206 3248 3331

EE 0,034320555 0,163549909 0,445655925 0,823

ES 116,8409824 136,3019532 145,330561 128,2084847 126,1834158 120,5011485 122,822469

FR 720,92

UK 665 773 810 682

GR 37 39 51 57 55 55 53

IT 228 253 278 286 296 289 301

LU 13,125 14,268 15,686 18,542 21,788 36,942 29,586

NL 628 670 724 765 799

PL 2,2 3,2 6,1 16,1 17,1 25,1 32,8

PT 17,4 15,2 18,7 16,4 14,2 19,9 21,1


36

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

BE 148,9363 153,8268 166,308 167,5752 176,8788 184,0959 188,9811

DE 834,8503 818,5686 855,818 778,4991 763,738 898,81 915,5962

DK

EE 0,49218361 0,76246597 1,02795496 1,38

ES 38,3973025 42,7569425 47,3633425 50,5954942 50,5727853 54,1882091 51,117424

FR 230,695

UK 209,065516 325,408886 332,670895 269,535842

GR 11,385 12,21 11,594

IT 86 95 105 110 116 113 115

LU 3,97 3,82 4,33 4,93 5,885 10,647 7,193

NL 192 193 204 205 220

PL 2,8 3,9 5,6 14,4 15,7 33,4 40,7

PT 2,8 2,4 2,1 4,1 2,0 3,0 4,6

Legal protection insurance administrative and acquisition costs (in millions €) – (Sources: See section 1.2)

Legal protection insurance loss ratios - (Sources: See section 1.2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 52,9% 53,5% 49,5% 46,7% 52,7% 60,6% 52,6%

BE 53,9% 52,2% 55,4% 40,9% 51,4% 46,5% 42,0%

CH 65,0% 64,1% 61,1% 56,6% 62,4% 52,4% 50,8%

DE 74,0% 72,3% 70,4% 71,0% 75,2% 71,9% 70,2%

EE 309,9% 63,1% 43,3% 10,4%

ES 23,4% 23,1% 22,2% 27,9% 19,0% 24,3% 24,3%

FR 59,0%

UK 20,1% 16,2% 15,0% 11,5%

GR 10,0% 9,9% 9,1% 8,2% 12,4% 11,5% 12,3%

IT 29,4% 30,0% 33,8% 33,6% 38,9% 42,3% 37,5%

LU 54,9% 46,5% 74,3% 50,4% 37,3% 35,5% 34,0%

NL 51,3% 52,8% 55,0% 51,9% 53,7%

PL 33,3% 18,3% 21,6% 11,7% 9,2% 8,7% 7,1%

PT 9,2% 14,5% 15,0% 17,6% 20,1% 6,0% 14,0%


37

Legal protection insurance expense ratios - (Sources: See section 1.2)

Legal protection insurance combined ratios - (Sources: See section 1.2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

BE 51,9% 51,2% 53,1% 51,5% 51,4% 50,3% 49,0%

DE 27,7% 26,7% 27,1% 24,3% 23,8% 27,7% 27,5%

EE 1434,1% 466,2% 230,7% 167,7%

ES 32,9% 31,4% 32,6% 39,5% 40,1% 45,0% 41,6%

FR 32,0%

UK 31,4% 42,1% 41,1% 39,5%

GR 20,7% 22,2% 22,0%

IT 37,7% 37,5% 37,8% 38,5% 39,2% 39,1% 38,1%

LU 30,2% 26,8% 27,6% 26,6% 27,0% 28,8% 24,3%

NL 30,6% 28,8% 28,2% 26,8% 27,5%

PL 127,0% 123,0% 91,6% 89,6% 91,9% 133,0% 124,0%

PT 16,0% 15,5% 11,0% 25,3% 14,0% 15,0% 21,9%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

BE 105,8% 103,4% 108,5% 92,4% 102,9% 96,8% 91,0%

DE 101,7% 99,0% 97,5% 95,3% 99,0% 99,6% 97,7%

EE 1743,9% 529,3% 273,9% 178,1%

ES 56,2% 54,5% 54,8% 67,3% 59,1% 69,3% 65,9%

FR 91,0%

UK 51,5% 58,3% 56,1% 51,0%

GR 33,1% 33,7% 34,3%

IT 67,1% 67,6% 71,6% 72,0% 78,0% 81,4% 75,7%

LU 85,2% 73,3% 101,9% 77,0% 64,4% 64,3% 58,3%

NL 81,8% 81,6% 83,1% 78,7% 81,2%

PL 160,3% 141,3% 113,3% 101,3% 101,0% 141,7% 131,1%

PT 25,2% 30,0% 26,0% 42,9% 34,1% 21,0% 36,0%


38

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

BG 1,949 1,949 1,953 1,956 1,956 1,956 1,956 1,956 1,956 1,956

CH 1,467 1,521 1,544 1,548 1,573 1,643 1,587 1,510 1,380 1,233

CY 0,575 0,584 0,582 0,577 0,576 0,583 0,585 0,585 0,585 0,585

CZ 30,804 31,846 31,891 29,782 28,342 27,766 24,946 26,435 25,284 24,590

DK 7,431 7,431 7,440 7,452 7,459 7,451 7,456 7,446 7,447 7,451

EE 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647 15,647

HR 7,413 7,569 7,497 7,401 7,325 7,338 7,224 7,340 7,289 7,439

HU 242,960 253,620 251,660 248,050 264,260 251,350 251,510 280,330 275,480 279,370

IS 86,180 86,650 87,140 78,230 87,760 87,630 143,830 172,670 161,890 161,420

LI 1,467 1,521 1,544 1,548 1,573 1,643 1,587 1,510 1,380 1,233

LV 0,581 0,641 0,665 0,696 0,696 0,700 0,703 0,706 0,709 0,706

MT 0,409 0,426 0,428 0,430 0,429 0,429 0,429 0,429 0,429 0,429

NO 7,509 8,003 8,370 8,009 8,047 8,017 8,224 8,728 8,004 7,793

PL 3,857 4,400 4,527 4,023 3,896 3,784 3,512 4,328 3,995 4,121

RO 3,127 3,755 4,051 3,621 3,526 3,335 3,683 4,240 4,212 4,239

SE 9,161 9,124 9,124 9,282 9,254 9,250 9,615 10,619 9,537 9,030

SI 225,977 233,849 239,087 239,568 239,596 239,640 239,640 239,640 239,640 239,640

SK 42,694 41,489 40,022 38,599 37,234 33,775 31,262 30,126 30,126 30,126

TR 1,440 1,695 1,777 1,677 1,809 1,787 1,906 2,163 1,997 2,338

UK 0,629 0,692 0,679 0,684 0,682 0,684 0,796 0,891 0,858 0,868

3. Other data

Exchange rate (Source: Eurostat)


39

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 221 225 235 245 259 274 283 276 286 301

BE 269 276 291 303 319 336 346 341 356 370

BG 17 18 20 23 26 31 35 35 36 39

CH 305 296 301 309 323 329 358 367 416 476

CY 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 17 17 18

CZ 83 84 92 105 118 132 154 142 150 156

DE 2.132 2.148 2.196 2.224 2.314 2.429 2.474 2.375 2.496 2.593

DK 185 189 197 207 219 228 235 224 236 240

EE 8 9 10 11 13 16 16 14 14 16

ES 729 783 841 909 986 1.053 1.088 1.048 1.049 1.063

FI 144 146 152 157 166 180 186 172 179 189

FR 1.543 1.588 1.656 1.718 1.798 1.887 1.933 1.886 1.937 1.997

GR 157 172 185 193 209 223 233 231 222 209

HR 28 30 33 36 40 43 48 45 45 45

HU 70 74 82 89 90 99 106 91 97 100

IE 131 141 150 163 178 189 179 161 156 159

IS 9 10 11 13 13 15 10 9 9 10

IT 1.302 1.342 1.398 1.436 1.493 1.554 1.575 1.520 1.552 1.578

LI 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4

LU 24 26 27 30 34 37 37 36 40 43

LV 10 10 11 13 16 21 23 19 18 20

MT 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7

NL 465 477 491 513 540 572 594 573 589 602

NO 204 199 209 245 271 288 311 273 318 353

PL 210 192 204 244 272 311 363 311 355 370

PT 141 143 149 154 161 169 172 169 173 171

RO 49 53 61 80 98 125 140 118 124 131

SE 267 279 292 298 318 338 333 292 350 388

SI 25 26 27 29 31 35 37 36 36 36

SK 26 29 34 38 45 55 64 63 66 69

TR 243 268 315 387 419 472 499 440 550 555

UK 1.699 1.643 1.768 1.847 1.956 2.063 1.810 1.573 1.710 1.747

GDP at market price (millions €) – Source: Eurostat


40

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

AT 8.064 8.100 8.143 8.201 8.254 8.283 8.319 8.355 8.375 8.404

BE 10.310 10.356 10.396 10.446 10.511 10.585 10.667 10.753 10.840 11.001

BG 7.891 7.846 7.801 7.761 7.719 7.679 7.640 7.607 7.564 7.369

CH 7.256 7.314 7.364 7.415 7.459 7.509 7.593 7.702 7.786 7.870

CY 706 715 730 749 766 779 789 797 819 840

CZ 10.206 10.203 10.211 10.221 10.251 10.287 10.381 10.468 10.507 10.487

DE 82.440 82.537 82.532 82.501 82.438 82.315 82.218 82.002 81.802 81.752

DK 5.368 5.384 5.398 5.411 5.427 5.447 5.476 5.511 5.535 5.561

EE 1.361 1.356 1.351 1.348 1.345 1.342 1.341 1.340 1.340 1.340

ES 40.964 41.664 42.345 43.038 43.758 44.475 45.283 45.828 45.989 46.153

FI 5.195 5.206 5.220 5.237 5.256 5.277 5.300 5.326 5.351 5.375

FR 61.424 61.864 62.292 62.773 63.230 63.645 64.007 64.350 64.659 64.995

GR 10.969 11.006 11.041 11.083 11.125 11.172 11.214 11.260 11.305 11.310

HR 4.445 4.443 4.442 4.444 4.443 4.441 4.436 4.435 4.426 4.412

HU 10.175 10.142 10.117 10.098 10.077 10.066 10.045 10.031 10.014 9.986

IE 3.900 3.964 4.029 4.112 4.208 4.313 4.401 4.450 4.468 4.571

IS 287 288 291 294 300 308 315 319 318 318

IT 56.994 57.321 57.888 58.462 58.752 59.131 59.619 60.045 60.340 60.626

LI 34 34 34 35 35 35 35 36 36 36

LU 444 448 455 461 469 476 484 494 502 512

LV 2.346 2.331 2.319 2.306 2.295 2.281 2.271 2.261 2.248 2.075

MT 395 397 400 403 405 408 410 414 414 416

NL 16.105 16.193 16.258 16.306 16.334 16.358 16.405 16.486 16.575 16.656

NO 4.524 4.552 4.577 4.606 4.640 4.681 4.737 4.799 4.858 4.920

PL 38.242 38.219 38.191 38.174 38.157 38.125 38.116 38.136 38.167 38.530

PT 10.329 10.407 10.475 10.529 10.570 10.599 10.618 10.627 10.638 10.572

RO 21.833 21.773 21.711 21.659 21.610 21.565 21.529 21.499 21.462 21.414

SE 8.909 8.941 8.976 9.011 9.048 9.113 9.183 9.256 9.341 9.416

SI 1.994 1.995 1.996 1.998 2.003 2.010 2.010 2.032 2.047 2.050

SK 5.379 5.379 5.380 5.385 5.389 5.394 5.401 5.412 5.425 5.392

TR 68.838 69.770 70.692 71.610 72.520 69.689 70.586 71.517 72.561 73.723

UK 59.216 59.435 59.697 60.039 60.410 60.781 61.192 61.595 62.027 62.515

Population (1st January) – Source: Eurostat


ISO Code

AT – AustriaBE – BelgiumBG – BulgariaCH – SwitzerlandCY – CyprusCZ – Czech RepublicDE – GermanyDK – DenmarkEE – Estonia

ES – SpainFI – FinlandFR – FranceUK – The United KingdomGR – GreeceHR – CroatiaHU – HungaryIT – ItalyLT – Lithuania

LU – LuxembourgLV – LatviaMT – MaltaNL – The NetherlandsPL – PolandPT – PortugalSE – SwedenSI – SloveniaSK – SlovakiaTR – Turkey


1

International Association of Legal Protection Insurance

Rue de l’Industrie 4

B-1000 Brussels

Tel. +32 (0)2 732 36 28

Fax +32 (0)2 732 06 22

[email protected]

www.riad-online.eu

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LEGAL PROTECTION INSURANCEINTERNATIONALE VEREINIGUNG DER RECHTSSCHUTZ-VERSICHERUNGASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE DE L’ASSURANCE DE PROTECTION JURIDIQUE

The Legal Protection Insurance Market in...

Documents

Transcript of The Legal Protection Insurance Market in...