On 1/15/2021 6:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Leaving aside my reservations on the newish UK 'supreme court' scheme,
this raises some very large questions:

https://cyclingindustry.news/supreme...-interruption/


Hoping for comment from Mr Beattie, and all of you who have thoughts to
offer.

In my understanding, a business flooded which did not purchase flood
insurance is just out.Â* Which is as it should be IMHO.Â* The damage looks
to me from regulatory action, not the chinese weapon itself.Â* I can't
see how a contract[1] could have an exclusion removed ex post facto. But
I'm open to other ideas.

[1] We do not of course know the language of every pertinent contract in
the class.

I suspect that future business interruption policies will expand the
clause that includes "Acts of God, Natural Disasters, War, etc." to
include pandemics and acts of Republicans.