header-logo header-logo

15 September 2020
Issue: 7902 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial , Covid-19 , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Business interruption case will help ‘thousands’

The High Court has clarified key issues regarding insurance cover for business interruption caused by COVID-19, in a landmark decision

The test case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority, FCA v Arch Insurance & Ors [2020] EWHC 2448 (Comm), will make it easier for thousands of businesses to make a business interruption claim. The court set out the order of circumstances as the pandemic unfolded and considered policy coverage and the correct construction of terms in relation to various specimen wordings and illustrative scenarios.

Michael Frisby, partner at Stevens & Bolton, said the judgment ‘provides clear guidance to identify which claims are covered in the wake of the pandemic.

‘It will have the effect of reducing the disputes over coverage arising from the pandemic, and should also help resolve some individual disputes. For insurers, the importance of this case is clear when you look at the numbers: it’s been estimated that members of the Association of British Insurers will pay out £1.2bn in the wake of COVID-19 and 75% of this will be for Business Interruption.’

Frisby praised the financial regulator for ‘acting speedily and effectively’ on the issue.

‘For the insured, without the FCA, they would have been left to fight an expensive, lengthy and complex dispute on their own to obtain resolution of the issues raised,’ he said.

‘Small enterprises with little funds or litigation experience were pitted against deep-pocketed and experienced insurers. But the FCA stepped up to the plate. By representing these smaller businesses, there was an equality of arms between claimant and defendant.’

Devonshires partner Stephen Netherway said the judgment ‘gives a much needed lifeline to struggling businesses across the UK and could prevent many from going bankrupt.

‘It provides for many a basis for presenting their COVID-19 business losses under their commercial insurances.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll