This recent New South Wales Supreme Court judgment articulates the well‑established position in jurisdictions around the world, including South Africa, that the words “arising from” in a policy require a less close causal connection between the causal event and the harm than the phrase “caused by”.

Judgments from Australia and other common law jurisdictions consistently indicate that the phrase “arising from” does not impose a requirement that the source be the proximate cause of the result. It is usually enough that there is a sufficient contributing cause that is more than tenuous.

“Caused by” usually connotes a “direct” or “proximate” relationship of cause and effect.

“Arising from” extends that relationship to a result that is less immediate but still carries a sense of consequence.

That is the general approach.  Context, of course, is everything, and the particular language used in the policy may lead to a different result.

Seymour Whyte Construction Pty Ltd v Liberty Mutual Insurance Company t/as Liberty Specialty Markets