To follow up on our post yesterday, an English court ruled in the test case regarding coverage of business interruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will follow up with a post that deals with the details of the 160-page decision.
The Financial Conduct Authority stated that "the ruling will provide welcome news for many policyholders." The press release states:
The judgment states that most, but not all, of the disease clauses in the sample provide coverage. It also states that certain clauses denying access to the sample provide coverage, but this is due to the detailed wording of the clause and how the business was affected by the government's response to the pandemic, including for example whether the business was subject to a mandatory closure order and whether the company was ordered to completely closed. The test case has also made it clear that the Covid-1
The judgment did not assign any specific recovery or declare that any insurer was liable for all insurances. And, of course, as we said yesterday, the decision covers the specific language of the selection policy that the court tried and did not involve if there was "physical loss or damage" to property.