The case was concerned with a preliminary issue between a reinsured and its retrocessionaire regarding what the reinsured had to prove to recover from the reinsurer. The reinsurance contract provided that the reinsurer was obliged, "to pay as may be paid thereon." It was common understanding of underwriters in the nineteenth century that this language required the reinsurer, "to pay without further inquiry any claim honestly paid by the [original] insurer. (2) However, the Commercial Court held the reinsured had to show that the claim for which he sought indemnity was indeed covered under the contract; it was not sufficient to simply demonstrate that payment had been made in good faith under the original contract. …