As more workers begin to return to the workplace, it is expected that there will be an increase in the number of lawsuits related to employee contraction of the virus in the workplace. While the general rule in most states is that the workers’ compensation system provides the exclusive remedy for work-related injuries and illnesses, claimants and their attorneys are eyeing exceptions to the workers’ compensation system in order to maximize their potential recovery ...
A dangerous trap for an unwary insured looking for insurance coverage can be a notice provision. To trigger certain liability insurance policies, the insurer may require that a “claim” be both made against an insured and that the insured then report such claim to its insurer during the time the single insurance policy is in effect. This is what is known as a “claims-made-and-reported” policy ...
I. Intact, compagnie d’assurances v. Théberge & Belley (1985) inc. and l’Union canadienne compagnie d’assurance and EBC inc.1In this case, the Court of Appeal held that an insurer who indemnified its insured pursuant to “contractors’ equipment” coverage cannot exercise its subrogation rights against the subcontractor who committed a fault.FACTSEBC was the general contractor for the construction of a deep water wharf ...
27.06.2022 In the newest episode of News from Poland—Business & Law, Jakub Barański from Wardyński & Partners’ Dispute Resolution & Arbitration practice discusses arbitration as a solution to the rising number of IT-related disputes. Konrad GrotowskiNote, the link will open in a new window, host of the programme, talks about the situation in Poland for retail, real estate development, and transit of goods from Ukraine ...
The Supreme Court has handed down its much anticipated decision relating to the coverage of business interruption insurance claims made following the COVID-19 pandemic. A key question was whether the Supreme Court ruling would finally provide the clarity that the expedited test case sought to achieve for both policyholders and insurers. The good news for all is that the Supreme Court has indeed provided much more clarity in relation to most issues ...
Two schools of thought have emerged on business interruption insurance coverage for coronavirus, either (a) it is a total panacea that will shift the risk of coronavirus revenue losses to insurance carriers or (b) there is no possible coverage for losses caused by coronavirus. As with most things in life and insurance, the truth lies somewhere in between and will depend on the specific policy at issue and the jurisdiction interpreting the policy ...
As each day that passes while COVID-19 spreads throughout the country, more businesses are closing their doors to protect their employees, customers, vendors, and other people with whom they come into contact. And many of them are wondering whether there is coverage for their business losses during this time. Business interruption or business income coverage is sometimes included in commercial property coverage ...
As each day that passes while COVID-19 spreads throughout the country, more businesses are closing their doors to protect their employees, customers, vendors, and other people with whom they come into contact. And many of them are wondering whether there is coverage for their business losses during this time. Business interruption or business income coverage is sometimes included in commercial property coverage ...
Further guidance for insurers and policyholders on business interruption claims is now available following an award made by Lord Mance in Certain Policyholders v China Taiping Insurance (UK) Co Ltd. Whilst the arbitration award will not be binding on the courts, it will no doubt prove persuasive and represents a victory for insurers, with Lord Mance finding no coverage under the denial of access cause in question ...
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued an important ruling in a case that had the potential to profoundly affect how public entities budget and pay for publicly funded projects in California, Busker v. Wabtec Corp. (Cal., Aug. 16, 2021,No. S251135) __ Cal.5th __, 2021 WL 3612126 ...
This is a question that arises with some regularity in trust administration, and one to which the English Court has offered a very welcome answer in the recent case of Sarah Butler-Sloss & Others v Charity Commission [2022] EWHC 974. This case has potentially wide-ranging implications and in this article we will focus on those relevant to trustees of Guernsey-law trusts ...
You are in charge of finances for a small business and are on vacation at the beach. Suddenly, you remember you have forgotten to pay a company bill. All is not lost, you think. You run to you room, grab a laptop, and bring it down to the Tiki Bar. There, you order a drink and connect to the hotel's wireless system. Then you call up your company's bank's Web page, click the "log-in" button, enter your password, and order a check issued to the creditor ...
The decision will be relevant for parties seeking to bring claims in the BVI courts where there are competing jurisdictions and systems of law at play. Funders and ATE insurers will also find the decision of interest where they are considering the merits of funding cross-border claims involving BVI defendants. A copy of the judgment is available here. Background WWRT had commenced proceedings in the BVI against Carosan, a BVI company, and BK, a Ukrainian businessman ...
Key Points Starting July 31, 2021, all employees who are not fully vaccinated shall be provided respirators for voluntary use. Exclusion pay is required even if an employee is not able to work. Employers should amend their COVID-19 Prevention Plans. Introduction On June 3, 2021, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board (Board) passed changes to the COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS). Initially, the Board voted 4-3 against the proposed ETS ...
Last month, a California appellate court rejected an insurer's arguments and affirmed a large punitive damages award against the insurer, providing a fresh roadmap for policyholders to obtain such relief when insurers engage in certain bad-faith practices. Mazik v. GEICO General Insurance Company (2019) 35 Cal.App.5th 455 involved a policyholder's claim for the $50,000 limits under his underinsured motorist policy ...
In a landmark victory for Federally-qualified health centers, a California Court of Appeal confirmed last October that federal and state law requires the State of California to pay FQHCs “100 percent” of their costs of furnishing core and other ambulatory services to Medi-Cal beneficiaries. (Tulare Pediatric Health Care Center v. State Department of Health Care Services (2nd Dist. 2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 163 ...
Last month, a California appellate court reversed the trial court and ruled that a subcontractor's insurer had a duty to defend an additional-insured general contractor in underlying construction-defect litigation. In McMillin Homes Construction, Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Insurance Company (2019) 35 Cal.App.5th 1042, a general contractor was an additional insured under a commercial general liability policy issued to its roofing subcontractor ...
Key Points In Martin v. California Coastal Commission, the Court of Appeal issued a rare opinion discussing local policies that are designed to manage and mitigate coastal bluff erosion. The court upheld a permit condition that required a new home to be set back 79 feet from the edge of a coastal bluff. The court reaffirmed that the policy at issue requires new development to be reasonably safe from failure and erosion over the entirety of the development’s lifetime ...
Employers in industries with fluctuating daily labor needs, such as retail services, often require employees to call in ahead of a scheduled shift to find out whether they are needed to work. According to a recently-published California Court of Appeal decision, employees who are required to use such a call-in procedure may be entitled to "reporting time pay" if they are told not to come to work that day—even if the employees do not physically report to work ...
Starting next year, California residents who don’t have health care coverage could face a state tax penalty. Under the new Minimum Essential Coverage Individual Mandate, California residents who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage for themselves and their dependents could owe a state tax penalty, unless they qualify for an exemption ...
Article PDFJust when businesses thought they had figured out their Proposition 65 compliance strategies, the State of California, through the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), has proposed a substantial change that will drastically limit the use of the short-form safe harbor warning first authorized in 2018 ...
At its Voting Meeting today the Commission adopted a new standard offer contract available to any Qualifying Facility (QF) of 20 megawatts or less seeking to sell electricity to a Commission-jurisdictional utility pursuant to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). Under PURPA, Commission-jurisdictional utilities must provide QFs the option of executing any existing PURPA contract for which they qualify ...
