An Appraisal of the Extent of Business Interruption Insurance Coverage in the Context of the Covid-19 Pandemic

Year 2024, Volume: 82 Issue: 1, 105 - 127, 07.06.2024

Melda Taşkın

https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2024.82.1.004

Abstract

Business interruption insurance covers against losses caused by an interference or interruption of business as a result of circumstances out of the hands of the policyholders, such as natural disasters, particularly fires, earthquakes, floods, or epidemic illnesses. As it is known, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, many businesses were forced to shut down operations except for online sales, caused by both the severe restrictions of the governments and also contagiousness of the virus. The business owners who could not operate for a long time and incurred a serious loss of earnings appealed to their insurers who provided coverage for business interruption losses depending on agreements that were signed before the pandemic. However, most of these applications were refused by insurers on the grounds that business interruption insurance policies provide coverage only for business interruption losses caused by physical damage. Accordingly, the extent of the business interruption insurance coverage, as well as the meaning and scope of the term “physical damage,” has been intensively discussed both in doctrine and also in court decisions after restrictions of the pandemic were lifted. On the other hand, it is a known fact that in many policies used in practice, the parties can add “extension” or “exclusion clauses” into the agreement.
This study aims to both determine the coverage possible to be included in business interruption insurance policies, by considering the general insurance terms and conditions frequently used in practice, and also to solve the matter of whether it is possible to indemnify the losses related to business interruption caused by the restrictions and interferences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Keywords

Business Interruption Insurance, Business Interruption Loss, Physical Damage, COVID-19 Pandemic, Extent of Business Interruption Insurance Coverage, Disease Clauses, Denial/Prevention Of Access Clauses, Public Authority Clauses, Hybrid Clauses

References

• Borghesi DA, ‘Business Interruption Insurance-A Business Perspective’ (1993) 17 (3) Nova Law Review 1147-1166. google scholar
• Clarke GW, ‘Problem Claims under Business Interruption Policies’ (1957) American Bar Association. Section of Insurance, Negligence and Compensation Law. Proceedings 89-102. google scholar
• Ergüne S, Olumsuz Zarar (1st edn, Beta 2008) google scholar
• French CC, ‘Federal Courts’ Recalcitrance in Refusing to Certify State Law COVID-19 Business Interruption Insurance Issues’ (2021-2022) 100, Texas Law Review Online 152-161. google scholar
• French CC, ‘The Aftermath of Catastrophes: Valuing Business Interruption Insurance Losses’ (2014) 30 (2) Georgia State University Law Review 461-520. google scholar
• Horn DP and Webel B, Business Interruption Insurance and COVID-19 (1st edn, Congressional Research Service 2021). google scholar
• French CC, ‘Forum Shopping COVID-19 Business Interruption Insurance Claims’ (2020) University of Illinois Law Review Online 187-202. google scholar
• Gylnn D and Rogers T, Riley on Business Interruption Insurance (11th edn, Sweet&Maxwell 2021) google scholar
• Gürses Ö, ‘The Supreme Court on Business Interruption Insurance and COVID-19: Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd [2021] UKSC 1’ King’s Law Journal (2021) 32 (1)71-83. google scholar
• Hummer PM, ‘Basics of Business Interruption Insurance: The Ins and Outs of Tricky Coverage’ (2002) 69 (3) Defense Counsel Journal 307-314. google scholar
• Kahler CM, ‘Business Interruption Insurance’ (1932) 161 Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 77-84. google scholar
• Knutsen ES, ‘The COVID-19 Pandemic and Insurance Coverage for Business Interruption in Canada’ (2021) 46 (2) Queen’s Law Journal (QLJ) 431-444. google scholar
• McHugh P, ‘Business Interruption Insurance in the Time of COVID-19: Who Should Foot the Bill?’ (2021) 29 (2) Journal of Law and Policy 491-521. google scholar
• Miller AG, ‘Business Interruption Insurance, A Legal Primer’ (1975) 24 (4) Drake Law Review 799-808. google scholar
• Medeiros M, ‘Physical Losses, Invisible Damages: Finding Coverage for Business Interruption Insurance Claims Sustained during the COVID-19 Pandemic’ (2022) 23 (2) Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology 631-670. google scholar
• Plaza J, ‘No End in Sight: Business Interruption Insurance Claims in New York after the Second COVID-19 Surge’ (2022) 47 (3) Journal of Corporation Law 817-842. google scholar
• Schirle C, ‘Time Element Coverages in Business Interruption Insurance’ (2007) 37 (1) The Brief 32-42. google scholar
• Schultz RE and Bardwell EC, ‘Property Insurance’ (1st edn, Rinehart & Co. 1959). google scholar
• Traynor PE, ‘The “Business Interruption” Insurance Coverage Conundrum: COVID-19 Presents a Challenge’ (2020-2021) 19 (1) DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal 65-96. google scholar
• Ünan S, ‘En Üst Derecedeki İngiliz Mahkemesi’nin Covid-19 Nedeniyle Meydana Gelen İş Durması Zararları Hakkında Verdiği 15 Ocak 2021 Tarihli Test Case Kararı (Financial Conduct Authority v. Arch and Others)’, in Bülent Sözer and Sezer Ilgın (eds), 2020 Sonrasında Deniz Ticareti ve Sigorta Hukuku: Olası Sorunlar, (Vedat Kitapçılık 2021) 135-185. google scholar
• Ünan S, İsteğe Bağlı Genel Sorumluluk Sigortasında Riziko (1st edn, Beta 1998). google scholar
• Vogel JW, ‘Pardon the Interruption: Obstacles to a Successful COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim’ (2021) 21 (3) Wake Forest Journal of Business and Intellectual Property Law 251-271. google scholar
• United States Court of Appeals, ‘Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hardinger’, 131 F. App’x 823, 826-27 (3d Cir. 2005). google scholar
• United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, ‘Gregory Packaging, Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. ofAm.’, No. 2:12- cv-04418, 2014 WL 6675934, at *6,25.11.2014. google scholar
• Superior Court of Massachusetts, ‘Matzner v. Seaco Ins. Co.’, No. 96-0498-B, 1998 WL 566658, at *3, 12.08.1998. google scholar
• United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Medford Division, ‘Oregon Shakespeare Festival Ass’n v. Great Am. Ins. Co.’, No. 1:15-cv- 01932-CL, 2016 WL 3267247, at *7-8, 07.06.2016). google scholar
• United States District Court For The Western District Of Missouri Southern Division, ‘Studio 417, Inc., et al. vs The Cincinnati Insurance Company’, Case No. 20-cv-03127-SRB, 12.08.2020. google scholar
• High Court of Justice Business And Property Courts Of England And Wales Commercial Court (Qbd), ‘Tkc London Ltd. v Allianz Insurance Plc’, Claim No CL-2020-000219, 15.10.2020. google scholar
• High Court of Justice Business And Property Courts Commercial Court (QBD) Financial List Financial Markets Test Case, ‘The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) vs. Arch Insurance and others’, FL-2020-000018, 16.10.2020. google scholar
• United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC), ‘The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) vs. Arch Insurance and others’, [2020]EWHC 2448 (Comm) 15.01.2021. google scholar
• United States District Court Middle District of Florida Orlando Division, ‘Urogynecology Specialist of Florida LLC, vs. Sentinel Insurance Company Ltd.’, Case No.: 6:20-cv-1174-Orl-22EJK, 24.09.2020. google scholar
• Turkish Insurance Arbitration Commission, 2021/51816, 21.05.2021. google scholar
• <https://covid19.who.int/?mapFilter=deaths> Date of Access 25 October 2022 google scholar
• <https://cclt.law.upenn.edu/> Date of Access 10 October 2022 google scholar
• <https://macafeeandedwards.com/pdf/commercial/property/Business%20Interruption-Gross%20 Earnings.pdf> Date of Access 25 October 2022 google scholar
• <https://www.allianz.co.uk/content/dam/onemarketing/azuk/allianzcouk/broker/docs/policy-wording/FR0076-business-interruption-all-risks-income-from-300717-updates-010418.pdf> Date of Access 25 October 2022. google scholar
• <https://axaxl.com/-/media/axaxl/files/pdfs/china/20162en.pdf> Date of Access 26 October 2022. google scholar
• <https://macafeeandedwards.com/pdf/commercial/property/Business%20Interruption-Gross%20 Earnings.pdf> Date of Access 25 October 2022. google scholar
• <http://www.istanbul.gov.tr/kurumlar/istanbul.gov.tr/PDF/il_Hifzissihha_Meclis_Karari_No_114. pdf> Date of Access 14 November 2022. google scholar
• https://casetext.com/case/travco-insurance-company-vward/analysis?citmgPage=1&sort=releva nce> Date of Access 10 October 2022. google scholar
• <https://casetext.com/case/gregory-packaging/analysis?sort=relevance&citingPage=1> Date of Access 11 December 2022. google scholar
• <https://casetext.com/case/matzner-v-seaco-insurance-company> Date of Access 11 December 2022. google scholar
• <https://casetext.com/case/nue-llc-v-or-mut-ins-co-1> Date of Access 10 December 2022. google scholar
• <https://casetext.com/case/studio-417-inc-v-cincinnati-ins-co> Date of Access 11 November 2022. google scholar
• <https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2020-0177-judgment.pdf> Date of Access 11 December 2022. google scholar
• <https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2020-0177-judgment.pdf> Date of Access 10 October 2022. google scholar
• <https://www.gov.uk/guidance/notifiable-diseases-and-causative-organisms-how-to-report> Date of Access 10 September 2021. google scholar
• <https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/sigorta-tahkim-komisyonu/hk-k-no-2021-51816-k-tarihi-21-5-2021> Date of Access 21 December 2022. google scholar
• <https://btlaw.com/-/media/fıles/blog/urogynecology-v-sentinel.ashx> Date of Access 21 November2022. google scholar