Financial Conduct Authority v. Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd and Others

Part of 2. Questions to the Counsel General and Minister for European Transition (in respect of his 'law officer' responsibilities) – in the Senedd at 3:57 pm on 9 February 2021.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Janet Finch-Saunders Janet Finch-Saunders Conservative 3:57, 9 February 2021

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.