header-logo header-logo

Businesses given green light for Covid claims

11 September 2024
Issue: 8085 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial , Insurance / reinsurance , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

Thousands of companies are entitled to claim business interruption insurance for losses caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the Court of Appeal has held in a landmark decision

In London International Exhibition Centre v RSA & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 1026, the court heard six expedited test cases concerning policies providing cover for disease occurring ‘at the premises’ of the policyholder.

Handing down their judgment this week, the court dismissed insurers’ appeals on the issues of causation, knowledge and the relevance of the requirement for closure of the premises to be on the approval or advice of a medical officer of health. Lords Justice Males and Popplewell and Lady Justice Andrews confirmed businesses with an ‘at the premises’ disease clause in their policies are entitled to claim an indemnity for their loss of gross profit caused by the UK government’s response to the pandemic.

Erich Kurtz, senior associate at Hugh James, which acted for ‘Why Not Bar’, said the judgment was ‘another crucial step in providing vital legal certainty’ to businesses.

Aaron Le Marquer, partner at Stewarts, acting for ExCel, said: ‘Many policyholders who were previously denied cover may in fact have significant payments available to them under their insurance policies.’

Stewarts is also acting in Bath Racecourse & Ors v Liberty Mutual Insurance, due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in January 2025. It will determine whether insurers can deduct furlough—government payments for furloughed employees during lockdown—from Covid business insurance payouts.

In 2021, the Supreme Court clarified what policyholders with a ‘radius’ clause must prove in order to recover business interruption losses resulting from their premises closing due to government action on Covid-19, in Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) [2021] UKSC 1. The case concerned loss due to disease occurring within a specified radius of the policyholder’s premises.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll