High Court to rule in July on how much FBD must pay pubs from Covid insurance test case 

FBD will learn how much it must pay out to publicans in July.

Two weeks in July have been set aside in the High Court for the hearing to decide what level of losses should be paid to four publicans who won test actions over a failure by insurer FBD to pay out on Covid disruption claims.

And the judge warned the case must take place in the two weeks allotted in the busy Commercial Court list.

Mr Justice McDonald said it would not be possible for the court to give any extra time before the end of the legal term in August to hear the case, due to a lack of judicial resources.

During the brief hearing the judge also criticised “unhelpful” correspondence on the issues of costs between solicitors for some of the publicans involved in the case, Aberken and Hyper Trust and FBD.

He said such exchanges should be conducted in a professional and business-like manner.

The test actions were taken by Dublin bars Aberken, trading as Sinnotts Bar; Hyper Trust Ltd, trading as The Leopardstown Inn; and Inn on Hibernian Way Ltd, trading as Lemon & Duke in Dublin.

The fourth action was taken by Leinster Overview Concepts Ltd, the owner of Sean's Bar, which is based in Athlone.

Policy covered losses

In his decision earlier this year, the outcome of which affects claims made by 1,000 Irish pubs and restaurants, the judge found a policy sold by FBD covered losses pubs sustained by having to close due to the pandemic.

When the matter returned before Mr Justice McDonald this week, the court heard the hearing about the issue of quantum will commence on July 6.

However, the judge warned that due to the demand on the Commercial Court list, the judge will only be available to hear the matter for two weeks.

It would not be possible to allocate a third week, this term, which concludes at the end of July.

In his decision earlier this year, the outcome of which affects claims made by 1,000 Irish pubs and restaurants, the judge found a policy sold by FBD covered losses pubs sustained by having to close due to the pandemic.

The court also heard that progress was being made between the parties on a variety of issues arising out of the proceedings including final orders from its previous judgments, costs, as well as issues relating to the quantum hearing.

The judge also criticised the contents of correspondence on the issues of costs between solicitors for Aberken and Hyper Trust and FBD.

While the precise contents of the correspondence were not cited in open court, the judge said such correspondence was "counterproductive" and did not help deal with the situation.

Counsel for the parties said they would take the judges remarks on board.

In his February judgement, the judge disagreed with FBD's interpretation of its business disruption policy regarding Covid-19.

A subsequent judgement ruled on what interpretation should be applied to the term 'closure' within FBD's Public House Policy of insurance, which is relevant to quantifying the losses.

The judge also ruled the pubs are entitled to their legal costs, but not on the highest scale as they had sought.