5 January 2021, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in The Financial Conduct Authority v Arch and Others: how the law has changed in light of the judgment and looks at certain practical issues that policyholders may need to consider going forward.
On 15 January 2021, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in
The Financial Conduct Authority v Arch and Others. Our alert of 19 January 2021 considered the implications of the judgment for policyholders seeking to claim for business interruption losses inflicted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The judgment represents the final word on the issues considered in the test case and is generally helpful to policyholders with non-damage business interruption coverage extensions. However, as noted in this alert, the judgment left some issues unresolved, particularly in relation to certain coverage clauses and how claims should be quantified. In relation to those issues that were decided, the judgment is likely to have wider implications for English insurance law generally. In particular, the Supreme Court considered issues of causation and trends clauses in far greater detail than the High Court judgment (for which see our alert of 22 September 2020. This alert briefly considers how the law
Hotel refused £250,000 payout as judge rules they are covered for bubonic plague but not Covid dailymail.co.uk - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from dailymail.co.uk Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.