Search for insurance help
UK decision on COVID Business Interruption claims handed down
- If there is at least one episode of COVID-19 within the insured radius, the “continuous cause” decision of the lower court is upheld an instruction given by a public authority may amount to a “restriction imposed” if it carries the imminent threat of legal compulsion or is in mandatory and clear terms and indicates that compliance is required without recourse to legal powers (our emphasis) – this overturns the lower court decision that only restrictions complying with legislation give rise to a claim under the public authorities cover Partial inability to use premises is still an inability;
- the High Court decision that the inability must be total is overturned;
- on causation, the Supreme Court held that if losses were also caused by other uninsured and not excluded effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, that does not exclude them; [this is in keeping with the normal rules of proximate cause]
- the Orient Express case was held to have been wrongly decided: area loss of business due to COVID-19 restrictions cannot be used as a trend argument to reduce the claim;
- trend clauses serving to reduce the claim are only valid to the extent that they are not in any way COVID related;
- this decision is a major victory for the Financial Conduct Authority (‘FCA’) and its joint claimants.
- one aspect the Supreme Court did not deal with: aggregation. This assumes some importance, given successive lockdowns and will no doubt be brought before the UK courts at some stage.
Management Liability insurance is designed to provide protection to both the business and its directors or officers for claims of wrongful acts in the management of the business.
Adroit Insurance & Risk
All information above has been provided by the author.
Adroit Insurance & Risk, ABN 75 078972 700, AFSL 244 348
This article originally appeared on Adroit Insurance & Risk Blog and has been published here with permission.