Gradually, the courts begin to decide. claims offered by many organizations against your insurers claim compensation for their stay closed during pandemic. Girona State Court made a breakthrough in February last year when it recognized a pizzeria’s right to 6,000 euros in damages. business interruption coverage This included your policy.
Although there are currently several courts in Pamplona, Lorca or Granada granting the same compensation to other affected persons – although there have been rulings against – no lawsuits have emerged to date. Valencian Community. Like this first sentence lost its autonomy Castellón 5th Circuit Court of First Instanceanticipating the claim filed by the responsible company two hotels Capital of La Plana and sentenced Mapfre to pay 75,130 €. a lawsuit leading to law firm Alicante Sánchez Butron Lawyers, He has filed more than 40 such cases on behalf of clients from all over Spain.
In this particular case, it was filed on behalf of the company Vivas Rapalo SA, which was managing the case. Jaime I hotels Y castle centre, the second is due to Meliá. A chain that sued its own insurer Generali for damages of 118 million liras for damages in all workplaces due to the quarantine imposed by the government.
The firm, represented by Sánchez Butrón, claimed to have a policy in place when the Government issued a state of alarm decision and forced tourism businesses to close. “all risk insurance for hotels”, designing business interruption coverage in their particular circumstances.
They argued from the insurer that the policy only includes this possibility if the activity is discontinued. It was linked to a property damage accident, as determined in the general terms of the contract that there is no compensation.
However, the president of the Castellón court argues that in the section where the scope of the job cut appears, it was not found to be subject to “any other coverage” but appeared “as is”. an autonomous possibility and independent.”
Considering the argument that the insurer’s coverage is limited in the following cases, General conditionsThe magistrate reminds that the Insurance Contract Law determines that these general conditions “in no event can be harmful to the insured” and must be included in the offer submitted to him by the insurer.
In this case, as the judgment points out, Mapfre has not accredited the delivery and receipt of this general condition.. However, the provision goes further. “limiting clause” The insured’s rights must be accepted in “clear writing”.
As a result, Castellón considers the firm’s claims and orders the defendant to pay 75,130 Euros for the damages, which it has calculated in the expert report submitted during the process, that their hotel has suffered losses. Mandatory closure decision between 19 March 2020 and 17 May same year. That is, during the first government-approved state of alert.
They told Sanchez Butrón’s office that they expect to receive new sentences in the coming weeks after several months of litigation. In the view of those in charge of the Alicante law firm, these compensations can be a real breath of fresh air for many businesses that are still suffering the consequences of lost revenue during the pandemic.
For their part, from Mapfre, they refused to comment, although they made a statement. They will appeal the decision.