It’s interesting that insurance Co didn’t point to an absence of proper inclusion clause. They tried to find exclusions that may help them to pull the fast one on a customer.
Which means the policy wording clearly matched the covered event.
Which means the policy wording clearly matched the covered event.
They quote the language in the policy and quote the national security apparatus as having made a determination that this was hostile action by a foreign government or their affiliates. Contractual disputes are often substantially less well-grounded in assertable facts than this one.