Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal held that a construction all risks policy covered foreseeable deterioration and development damage after expiry, and remitted quantum.
The judge was entitled to find that Mr Prentice did not condone Mr Jones' dishonest acts, so the exclusion clause did not apply. The acts giving rise to the two claims were not sufficiently similar nor did they arise from a series of related matters or transactions, so Axis could not aggregate the claims. The judge's findings were not plainly wrong or irrational and should not be disturbed on appeal.
Source excerpt
The initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan and the introduction into the UK were too remote to constitute a single occurrence for aggregation under the policy. The relevant occurrences for aggregation were the UK Government's actions and restrictions. Aggregation does not operate per insured location but collectively. Losses proximately caused by a covered event during the policy period are recoverable even if suffered after the period, subject to the maximum indemnity period.
Source excerpt
Zurich is estopped by convention from denying indemnity for refunds paid to Challengers for trips cancelled after 31 May 2020, subject to credit for third party recoveries. The policy, on its true construction, only covers irrecoverable third party costs, but Zurich's conduct and claims handling created a binding estoppel. Aggregation clause does not operate to reduce WCE's claim in these circumstances.
Source excerpt
WRBC Corporate Member Ltd v AXA XL Syndicate Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1673 (Comm) (28 June 2024)
The High Court refused a preliminary issue trial in a reinsurance dispute over aggregation of Covid-19 contingency losses, ordering all issues to be tried together.
The court held that the term 'catastrophe' in the relevant property catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance contracts is not limited to events causing physical damage, nor does it require suddenness or violence. The COVID-19 pandemic and related closure orders constituted a 'catastrophe' for the purposes of the contracts. The 'Hours Clauses' do not restrict recovery to losses suffered only during the stipulated hours period; rather, an individual loss occurs when the insured is first affected (e.g., closure), and all resulting business interruption losses are recoverable, even if they extend b…
Source excerpt
UnipolSai Assicurazioni SAP v Covea Insurance PLC (Rev2) [2024] EWHC 253 (Comm) (09 February 2024)
High Court appeal under s.69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 concerning COVID-19 reinsurance losses, catastrophe aggregation, and Hours Clauses.
Axis Specialty Europe SE v Discovery Land Company LLC & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 7 (15 January 2024)
Court of Appeal held that an insurer could not rely on a dishonesty exclusion or aggregate two claims arising from separate frauds involving client money.
Various Eateries Trading Ltd v Allianz Insurance PLC [2024] EWCA Civ 10 (16 January 2023)
The initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan, while a single occurrence, was too remote from the claimant's business interruption losses to be the relevant occurrence for aggregation under the policy. The relevant occurrences were the UK government actions (such as closure orders) that directly led to the losses. The judge's evaluative judgment on remoteness and aggregation was correct and should not be disturbed.
Source excerpt
Commercial Court stage 1 trial on Stonegate’s Covid-19 business interruption claims, addressing aggregation, causation, AICW limits, and deduction of government support.
Explore more
