3. What discussions has the Counsel General had with other law officers in the UK regarding the impact of the judgment in the case of Financial Conduct Authority (Appellant) v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd and others (Respondents)? OQ56265

The Welsh Government—[Inaudible.]

I can't hear.

No. There is a problem, Counsel General, with your sound. I wonder if you, or if broadcasting—

Is that better, Dirprwy Lywydd?

That is better, thank you, yes.

The Welsh Government welcomes the clarity that the judgment provides for business and individual customers. And we will continue to work with the UK Government, devolved Governments, and the industry, to monitor the impact of this court judgment on the matter of legitimate insurance claims.

Thank you. It's really heartening to hear that you are working positively with the UK Government on an issue such as this. The appeals clarify whether a variety of insurance policy wordings cover business interruption losses resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, and public health measures taken by UK authorities, in response to the pandemic, from March 2020. So, as you've rightly pointed out, the judgment is some good news for businesses. For example, disease clauses were interpreted as covering business interruption losses resulting from COVID-19. The Supreme Court held that an instruction given by a public authority may amount to a restriction imposed in prevention of access and hybrid clauses. And it is also sufficient for a policy holder to show that, at the time of any relevant Government measure, there was at least one case of COVID-19 within the geographical area covered by the clause. So important were the issues raised in the case that, of course, it proceeded directly to the Supreme Court under the leapfrog procedure. What steps will you take to help make businesses across Wales aware of the important judgment that has been made, and the most positive impact that this could potentially have on them? Thank you.

Well, I reassure the Member that, I think it was in April of last year that I and the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport first met with the ABI—the Association of British Insurers—in relation to this specific matter, before litigation was contemplated. And it is to be welcomed that the 21 types of policy clause that have been sampled by the Supreme Court have been the subject of this clear outcome. And the practical effect is that the insuring clauses, which are the subject of the litigation, will provide the cover. We continue to point businesses with whom the Welsh Government have connections and relationships to the information available, and to resources that are in the public domain, in relation to this important judgment. Because it does provide a kind of clarity that businesses have been asking for for many, many months.

Question 4 [OQ56261] has been withdrawn. Therefore question 5, David Melding.