Article summary
Insurance & Reinsurance analysis: Does a disease clause that requires physical damage make sense? Bellini is a restaurant in Sunderland that was closed as a result of the Covid lock-down. It had a licensed premises policy with business interruption cover that apparently included an extension for ‘Murder, suicide or disease’. But its claim was denied because the clause required there to have been ‘damage’, defined as ‘physical loss, physical damage and physical destruction’. The Commercial Court held that that was right, and that result has now been upheld by the Court of Appeal. The case concerns the limits of the ability of the court to correct what are alleged to be obvious mistakes in an insurance policy–and revisits the question of illusory cover, one of the reasons given by the Supreme Court in FCA v Arch for taking an expansive approach to causation, but with a somewhat different result. Written by Neil Hext KC, barrister at 4 New Square...
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial