Lals Holdings Limited (and The Companies Identified In Schedules 1 To 3 Of The Claim Form) v (1) Emirates Insurance Company (PSC) (2) Siaci Insurance Brokers LLC [2024] DIFC CA 002 (03 July 2024)

Lals Holdings Limited (and The Companies Identified In Schedules 1 To 3 Of The Claim Form) v (1) Emirates Insurance Company (PSC) (2) Siaci Insurance Brokers LLC [2024] DIFC CA 002 (03 July 2024)

The Loss of Attraction Clause is not limited to specific local incidents involving physical closure or sealing off by police or statutory authority; it is capable of responding to national or regional governmental response to a global pandemic. The language of the clause, read objectively and in context with the Schedule and the policy as a whole, does not impose the limitations argued by EIC. Overlap between the Closure Clause and Loss of Attraction Clause does not create incoherence or redundancy sufficient to override the clear wording. The appeal is dismissed as no error of law or fact is demonstrated in the primary judge's construction.

Citation
[2024] DIFC CA 002
Parties
Claimant/respondent: LALS Holdings Limited; First Defendant/appellant: Emirates Insurance Company (PSC); Second Defendant: SIACI Insurance Brokers LLC
Jurisdiction
United Arab Emirates
Judgment Date
03 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Business Interruption Insurance, Policy Interpretation, COVID 19 Coverage, Contractual Construction, Jurisdiction
Insurance Law Contract Law Commercial Law Business Interruption Insurance Policy Interpretation COVID 19 Coverage Contractual Construction Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LALS Holdings Limited

Claimant/respondent

Emirates Insurance Company (PSC)

First Defendant/appellant

SIACI Insurance Brokers LLC

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of Loss of Attraction Clause in business interruption insurance policy
  2. 2 Interaction and overlap between Closure Clause and Loss of Attraction Clause
  3. 3 Applicability of insurance coverage to national/regional government pandemic response

Ratio Decidendi

The Loss of Attraction Clause is not limited to specific local incidents involving physical closure or sealing off by police or statutory authority; it is capable of responding to national or regional governmental response to a global pandemic. The language of the clause, read objectively and in context with the Schedule and the policy as a whole, does not impose the limitations argued by EIC. Overlap between the Closure Clause and Loss of Attraction Clause does not create incoherence or redundancy sufficient to override the clear wording. The appeal is dismissed as no error of law or fact is demonstrated in the primary judge's construction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The Appellant shall pay the Respondents’ costs of the appeal to be assessed by the Registrar if not able to be agreed.