Business Interruption Insurance - Permission to Appeal Refused
We have commented regularly on the business interruption insurance cases following the Covid-19 pandemic as they have made their way through the courts.
20.12.2024
Today, the Supreme Court has refused permission for Allianz to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of London International Exhibition Centre plc v Allianz Insurance Plc [2024] EWCA Civ 1026.
Garon Anthony, Financial Services Partner comments:
"Todays’ decision by the Supreme Court is a welcome early Christmas present for business interruption insurance policyholders who have “at the premises” disease clause in their policies and who have previously had their claims rejected by insurers for coverage reasons.
Many policyholders who are across these issues, and aware that they had such clauses in their policies, can now finally pursue their claims against insurers. But other policyholders who had claims rejected in the past on the coverage grounds advanced by insurers in the ExCel case, and who have not been following legal developments, would be well advised to go back and check their BI policies to see if the Court’s decision could allow them to re-open the claim and re- engage with insurers.”
Key Contacts
Jane Anderson
Legal Director
Related Articles
Expert CommentFCA consultation on penalty decision-making: practical implications for firmsOn 15 June 2026, the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) published a new consultation (“the Consultation”) proposing targeted reforms to how financial penalties are assessed and applied in enforcement cases when the FCA has concluded that its rules have been broken by regulated firms or individuals .
Expert CommentExpert comment: what the latest fraud headlines mean for consumers, platforms, businesses and financial institutionsRecent headlines point to a fraud landscape that is both expanding and changing shape.
Expert CommentSupreme Court confirms furlough payments reduce business interruption insurance claimsThe Supreme Court has just handed down a significant judgment confirming that furlough payments received under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (“CJRS”) must be deducted from business interruption insurance (“BII”) claims by policyholders where the policy contains a so called “savings” clause (which can operate to reduce insurance pay outs by deducting any expenses saved by the business during the interruption).
