The UK Supreme Court has denied Allianz Insurance plc’s appeal in a COVID-19 business interruption lawsuit filed by the London International Exhibition Centre, also known as ExCel.
ExCel pursued its claim under an “at the premises” disease clause, seeking £16 mn in compensation. The case, initially won by ExCel in 2023, was later appealed by a group of insurers.
However, the Court of Appeal upheld the original ruling, noting that the Supreme Court’s prior decision in a Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) test case applied to disease clauses at specific premises.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that most disease clauses and some prevention of access clauses cover pandemic-related losses and government-mandated shutdowns. According to the FCA, the test case aimed to clarify contractual uncertainties around business interruption policies during the pandemic.
The ruling settled legal questions regarding 14 policy types issued by six insurers, eliminating the need for individual policyholders to argue key coverage issues. However, the test case did not address all disputes or settlement amounts.
Aaron Le Marquer, head of policyholder disputes at Stewarts Law, expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
We are pleased, though not surprised, that the Supreme Court confirmed its stance from the FCA test case. We hope insurers will now begin paying long-overdue claims
Aaron Le Marquer, head of policyholder disputes at Stewarts Law
Allianz was the only insurer to request the Supreme Court’s review. The High Court rejected the application, stating that Allianz failed to raise an arguable legal issue.
Stewarts Law, representing ExCel, called the decision a victory for policyholders. Thousands of businesses with similar disease clauses can now pursue claims.