Business interruption insurance is typically sold as part of commercial property insurance. Most business interruption cover requires the interruption to, or interference with, the business to result from damage to insured property. However, some policies include additional ‘non-damage’ extensions which provide cover for business interruption losses in other circumstances, such as where access to or use of the premises of the business is prevented or hindered as a result of circumstances other than property damage. In March 2020, following the coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdown, many businesses sought to claim under their business interruption insurance for related losses, but few were indemnified due largely to uncertainty as to how business interruption policies with non-damage extensions responded to a national outbreak of infectious disease. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), in consultation with policyholders and insurers, commenced a test case under the Financial Markets Test Case Scheme (the FCA test case). The first instance hearing took place before a Divisional Court in July 2020 and judgment was handed down on 15

Law360, London: A restaurant group and insurance giant Allianz have settled a £16.4m dispute brought by the hospitality business over payouts for coronavirus-linked lockdown restrictions.

This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note sets out key news and guidance in relation to coronavirus (COVID-19) that is relevant to family proceedings, including guidance issued by the President of the Family Division and other members of the judiciary. It also considers case law and consultations in relation to remote hearings. The World Health Organization declared an end to the coronavirus emergency on 5 May 2023 and there are currently no coronavirus related restrictions in force in the UK. However, during the coronavirus emergency, hearings were permitted to take place remotely where deemed appropriate by the judge allocated to the case and guidance was issued for the Family Court in this regard, see: President of the Family Division’s guidance and The Remote Access Family Court guidance. Mediation Information and assessment meetings could also be dealt with remotely. Online mediation remains available, subject to the practice of particular provider involved. For guidance on remote and/or hybrid hearings generally, see Practice Note: Remote and hybrid hearings in the Family Court. President

Archived: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer maintained. It summarised the temporary changes which were made to the Criminal Procedure Rules (CrimPR), SI 2020/759, by the Criminal Procedure (Amendment No 2) (Coronavirus) Rules 2020, SI 2020/417 which enabled the criminal courts in England and Wales to operate during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. These temporary amendments were expired as the restrictions imposed by the pandemic were removed and in their entirety on 28 June 2022 by virtue of the section 201 of the Police Crime Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PSCSA 2022). PSCSA 2022 also replaced these with permanent amendments relating to the use of live audio links and live video links in eligible criminal proceedings in England and Wales. For further information, see Practice Note: Remote hearings in the criminal courts. As part of the government’s response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA 2020) temporarily amended the following provisions expanding the use of live links and video links in the criminal proceedings

This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note focuses on the implications for restructuring and insolvency court work in the light of temporary rules introduced in the context of coronavirus (COVID-19). For the implications for litigation generally, see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19) implications for dispute resolution [Archived]. Are the courts operating normally? The Supreme Court continues to hear cases with hearings and judgments being conducted in person or virtually. The Court of Appeal building is open during the hours of 10 am to 4.30 pm (Monday to Friday). E-filing is mandatory for legally represented persons in the Court of Appeal from 14 February 2022—see LNB News 14/02/2022 58. The RCJ remain open, including the fees office. Fees can also be paid by telephone between the hours of 10 am and 4 pm or by email (RCJfeespayments@justice.gov.uk)—see LNB News 01/03/2021 17. The appointment based system is available to book by calling 0203 936 8957. The fees office has relocated to the West Green Building. Judicial

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. EU and UK regulators have been monitoring the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) on payment services and systems, with a view to ensuring that consumers can continue to make payments safely throughout the pandemic. The virus has spurred the growth of contactless payments while highlighting issues around access to cash. This Practice Note provides a summary of the impact of coronavirus on payment services and systems in the UK and EU. In the EU, on 25 March 2020, the European Banking Authority (EBA) issued a statement on payment issues in light of coronavirus. Among other things, the EBA called on payments services providers (PSPs) to contribute to measures that limit the spread of coronavirus. In the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) says that it is in regular contact with the industry, the government and other regulators to understand the impact of coronavirus on the payments market. It expects firms to manage the risks to consumers and to provide support

It is unclear whether in this instance the employer: • requires employees to test for coronavirus (COVID-19), or simply encourages them to do so • ‘prefers’ them to test regularly, eg daily or weekly, or only when they have symptoms of coronavirus • requires employees to stay away from the workplace if they test positive, and if so for how long The right to pay and wages Subject to the terms of the contract, there is a duty to pay wages whenever an employee is ready, willing and able to work. If they are ready and willing to work but unable to do so for reasons beyond their control (ie an unavoidable or involuntary impediment), then they are also entitled to be paid. Different considerations apply to a failure to work because of sickness or other circumstances, which may be governed by express or implied contractual

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Lawyers across the world have been grappling with many common areas of concern in connection with the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. There are a number of areas that are particularly relevant to banking and finance lawyers. For more detail and analysis on these, see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19) implications for Banking & Finance lawyers, which is updated regularly with news, practical guidance and analysis covering the impact of COVID-19 developments. This Practice Note covers subject areas such as Force Majeure (which differs from how the derivatives Force Majeure provisions apply) and execution of documents as well as setting out the implications for different types of banking and finance lawyers. This Practice Note focuses on the implications for derivatives lawyers and how the COVID-19 pandemic has already affected the derivatives market, as well as how it will cause disruption on the market for the foreseeable future. It also sets out the practical implications and how derivatives practitioners should be responding to the pandemic. Which

On 30 March 2020, the Office of the Regulator of Community Interest Companies at Companies House (the Regulator) published an information page for community interest companies (CICs) regarding the challenges that they may be facing and services that it is able to offer during the coronavirus crisis, summarised as follows: • file online—the online filing services to incorporate CICs, file accounts, file the confirmation

On 26 March 2021 Companies House announced that the automatic filing extensions granted by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act (CIGA) 2020 for filing deadlines between 27 June 2020 and 5 April 2021, to relieve the burden on companies during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, will come to an end for filing deadlines that fall after 5 April 2021. For confirmation statement filings, accounts filings and event-driven filings after 5 April 2021, there will be no further automatic extensions and any deadlines that fall after this date will go back to normal. For mortgage charges, while those with an interest in the charge created up to and including 4 April 2021 will continue to receive an automatic extension of ten additional days to file the particulars of a charge, those with an interest in the charge created after 4 April 2021 will need to file within 21 days as normal. Companies that are eligible and cite coronavirus issues in their application can still apply for a three-month extension for accounts filing

The Acas guidance for employers and employees on coronavirus (COVID-19) is silent as to how disciplinary meetings should be dealt with during the coronavirus lockdown. However, where employees are not currently attending the workplace it does say that, if an employee refuses to attend work without a valid reason, this could result in disciplinary action. The response below refers in a number of places to the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures (Acas Code) and guidance on discipline and grievances at work. For information on the significance of the Acas Code, see Practice Note: Acas disciplinary and grievance code—application. What can an employee do if the employer insists on proceeding with a disciplinary hearing during the Coronavirus lockdown, either remotely or by attendance at a neutral place? The

For information on workplace issues in light of the fast-changing position in relation to coronavirus (COVID-19), see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19)—issues for employers [Archived]. For information on the doctrine of frustration generally, see: • Practice Note: Distinguishing dismissal from other forms of termination, in particular the section titled: Operation of law, including frustration • Harvey AII[402]–[406.02]: Frustration The doctrine of frustration is one instance of termination by operation of law: where, without the fault of either party, some supervening event occurs which was not reasonably foreseeable at the time when the contract was made, and which renders further performance of the contract either totally impossible or something radically different from what the parties bargained for, then the contract is forthwith discharged by operation of law. The superseding event must be one that was unforeseen and not catered for in the contract. The precise terms of each contract must therefore be considered in order to ascertain which circumstances were, or