Most people by now are familiar with the business interruption insurance coverage disputes raging in courts since the onset and spread of Covid-19. With the first few state supreme courts weighing in on this dispute in the last week and following the overwhelming majority of lower court decisions that no coverage applies, the trend seems to be pretty solidified thus far in favor of insurance companies. Nevertheless, I am not aware of any claims being brought on the general liability side where a similar coverage dispute can arise.
Having said that, there is a case currently being litigated in Florida where a lawsuit was filed by a Florida condo association against its general liability carrier that raises questions about the interpretation of property damage in general liability policies. The case revolves around a dispute of whether disruption from a noisy gym counts as property damage under a commercial general liability policy, which defines “property damage” as “physical injury to tangible property.” It is noteworthy that property damage is defined differently in general liability policies, which could ultimately lead to different conclusions by the courts than the rulings on business interruption disputes. It will be interesting to see how this case ultimately comes out.
Once on the subject of general liability insurance, for those struggling with assault and battery (A & B) exclusions, markets are starting to spring up offering stand-alone A & B policies and in states where such coverage has become commonly excluded. Although I have never seen joint loss clauses on general liability policies, it may be worthwhile to attempt to obtain one where a separate A & B policy is procured.