1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |COVID-19 Business Interruption: Financial Conduct Authority Test Case Ruling Expected on Friday

COVID-19 Business Interruption: Financial Conduct Authority Test Case Ruling Expected on Friday

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.13.21

The U.K. Supreme Court has announced that on Friday, January 15, 2021 it will hand down its decision in the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)) v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd., et al. matter (known as the FCA “test case”). The case concerns the construction of certain insurance policy provisions that purport to provide coverage in the event of business interruption. The Court below considered the construction of each policy wording and the FCA, the Appellant Insurers and the Hiscox Interveners appeal on a number of points.

Broadly speaking, the Supreme Court is asked to determine:

  1. certain matters of construction relating to:
    1. "Disease Clauses" (i.e. those which can be triggered by the occurrence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ("COVID-19"), typically within a specified distance of the insured’s premises);
    2. "Prevention of Access Clauses" (i.e. those triggered by public authority intervention preventing access to, or use of, premises as a result of COVID-19); and
    3. "Hybrid Clauses" (i.e. those clauses which contain wording from both Disease and Prevention of Access Clauses), and
  2. whether the Court below was correct:
    1. to apply certain counterfactual scenarios in relation to the operation of the clauses in relevant policies which provided for loss adjustments (the "Trends Clauses"); and
    2. in its analysis of Orient-Express Hotels Ltd v Assicurazioni Generali S.p.A.

After the Supreme Court’s opinion is released, Crowell & Moring LLP will provide a summary of the ruling, which concerns wordings distinct from those typically being litigated in the COVID-19 related business interruption cases across the United States.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25

A Sign of What’s to Come? Court Dismisses FCA Retaliation Complaint Based on Alleged Discriminatory Use of Federal Funding

On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future....