Marsh bites back as RSA alleges it is on the hook for wording in FCA BI test case
Marsh has disputed RSA allegations its clients should be liable for brokered policy contract issues in the Financial Conduct Authority’s business interruption test case, as brokers were dragged into the ongoing proceedings.
Insurers hit back at claims they were liable to pay out on BI policies in defense documents filed on Tuesday 23 June, all arguing that policies were never meant to pay out for global events.
Arguing on behalf of policyholders, the FCA has said if necessary it will rely on the contra proferentem argument, also known as ‘interpretation against the draftsman’, which it says means the defendants’ subjective intentions are “neither relevant or admissible”.
RSA has four wordings under scrutiny
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@insuranceage.co.uk.
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@insuranceage.co.uk to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@insuranceage.co.uk to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@insuranceage.co.uk
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@insuranceage.co.uk