In this judgment the insured restaurant argued that the requirement in the murder, suicide or disease extension that the interruption or interference with the insured business be caused by damage did not require physical damage.
It was common cause that there had been no physical loss or damage to the insured premises or property used
In this high court judgment the court considered whether “at the premises” disease cover entailed the same approach to proximate causation as the disease cover considered by the Supreme Court in Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Limited [2021] UK SC 1.
The relevant wording of the policy in the lead action read:
“The
In April 2023 the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed that a tenant may claim a remission of rental where vis major interferes with the tenant’s beneficial use and enjoyment of the property, unless the terms of the lease provide otherwise. However, if the premises are sub-let there will be no interference with the head tenant’s
In this recent Namibian High Court judgment, the insurer argued that the policy was invalid, and could not be concluded, because the formation of an insurance contract depends on the happening of a specified uncertain event and that at the time of the conclusion of the policy the event was already certain.
The insurer
In this judgment the Supreme Court of Appeal decided that the lessor was entitled to evict its tenant as a result of non-payment of rental because the tenant’s pleas that it could not pay rent because of the Covid-19 pandemic could not excuse non-payment from September 2020.
The court said that it was trite that
In these October 2022 judgments (judgment 1 and judgment 2), the court held that government furlough payments were to be deducted from loss calculations as savings. The insured’s argument that the payments were simply a reimbursement of employment costs was rejected.
The courts had regard to the basic rules of a contract of
There are still a number of pending Covid-19 policy interpretation cases being dealt with by the courts in England in the coming months. Stonegate v MS Amlin, Various eateries v Allianz and Gregg’s v Zurich all grapple with the issue of aggregation.
Stonegate and the other claimants for example argue that their business interruption insuring
This no-fault compensation scheme previously discussed here, has now amended regulations and directions published on the 4th April 2022, available here.
The purpose of the Scheme is to provide expeditious and easy access to compensation for persons who suffer from a Covid-19 Vaccine Injury caused by the administration of an improved Covid-19
In this recent judgement, the UK High Court dealt with a dispute relating to the policy’s denial of access non-damage clause which provided cover for loss “resulting from interruption or interference with the business where access to or premises is restricted or hindered for more than the franchised period shown in your schedule arising directly
On 11 June 2021, South Africa’s landscape regarding mandatory vaccination in the workplace changed with the publishing of the Consolidated Directions on Occupational Health and Safety in certain workplaces (the Directive). This Directive led to wide debate on an employer’s ability to mandate employees to receive the Covid-19 vaccine. Employers potentially face reputational and financial