Lockdown Damages: Suicides
Re: the documented 400% rise in Suicide attempts during Lockdowns in Germany
English Translation of Berliner Zeitung article– from Jan 07, 2022
Click the “View Fullscreen” button below to get full functionality in fullscreen.
Lockdown Insurance Case
Re: the Legality of Insurers not to compensate Businesses for Losses due to the Lockdown Measures
Facts of the Case
*updated Feb 6, 2022
Stéphane Manigold, owner of four restaurants (and president of restaurants consortium Eclore) in Paris brought a case against French insurer AXA, France’s biggest insurance group.He filed a lawsuit demanding that AXA cover his operating losses after a government order in mid-March to close bars and restaurants to try to slow the spread of the virus. [1]
AXA has a 13% market share among French craftsmen and merchants. AXA said it only had 200 contracts in its portfolio with French businesses in various sectors that provide business interruption guarantees when there is no physical damage involved. [2]
This case potentially puts the burden of financial loss/ compensation due to the corona measures onto the insurance companies.
It has global significance.
…More information is needed…
AXA had argued its policy did not cover business disruption caused by the health crisis. [1]
“The vast majority of AXA France contracts for catering professionals provide that a generalized event like the one we are experiencing today cannot bring into play the contractual guarantees,” AXA said in an emailed statement. [1]
Insurers argue that pandemic risk is excluded from operating loss insurance guarantees because it is not insurable. French insurers would otherwise have to compensate 20 billion euros per month for operating losses due to the lockdown, industry estimates show. [2]
…More information is needed…
a Paris court ruled that the firm should pay Manigold two months’ worth of revenue losses caused by the virus pandemic. [1]
The court said that the administrative decision to close the restaurant qualified for insurance cover as a business interruption loss. [2]
AXA said on Tuesday May 22, 2020, it would meet the bulk of business interruption claims from some restaurant owners in France after it lost a court case that was seen as a potential precedent for coronavirus-related disputes across the world. [1]
AXA has said it will appeal the Paris ruling, but Chief Executive Thomas Buberl said on Tuesday the company was seeking an amicable solution and planned to meet the bulk of claims from restaurant owners whose contracts had some ambiguity in them. [1]
“These contracts represent less than 10 per cent out of total contracts with restaurant owners and I am confident that we will find a solution,” Buberl said. [1]
“We want to compensate a substantial part of these contracts, we want to do it quickly.” [1]
AXA also said it would provide a further 500 million euros ($546 million) in aid for small companies, on top the plans already announced by French insurers to invest 1.7 billion euros in domestic companies. [1]
Stephane Manigold, the owner of four Paris restaurants who brought the case against the French insurer, told Reuters that since the court decision his team had received calls from Britain, South Africa, Spain and the United States asking for details of his contract and the court’s ruling. [1]
“This decision in Paris has a global resonance,” he said. [1]
“This is a collective victory,” he told Reuters after the ruling. [2]
“This means that all companies with the same clause can appeal to their insurers,” Manigold’s lawyer, Anais Sauvagnac, said. [2]
“This decision … revives questions among many insured,” said a French lawyer, who advises insurers and brokers over contracts, of the Paris court decision. [1]
…More information is needed…
……
source: ….
….
source: ….
….
source: ….
AXA, Buberl, France, Insurance, Lockdown, Manigold, Paris, Restaurant, revenue losses
Supreme Court v Lockdown Case
Re: the Legality of Lockdown Measures during the Corona Scare
Facts of the Case
A lawsuit filed by the Vox party challenging the Lockdown Measures. [1]
During the first six weeks of the lockdown, stay at home measures were so strict that the Spanish weren’t even allowed to go outside to exercise or walk their dogs. [2]
In one case, police were called after a neighbor spotted two brothers playing soccer in their own back yard. [2]
As we (SummitNews) previously highlighted, Spain’s lockdown laws were so draconian that at one point authorities briefly told citizens that wearing masks while swimming in the sea was mandatory. [2]
For many months during hot weather, wearing masks in every outdoor setting, even on beaches, was compulsory.
People were also issued fines of €2,000 euros for “disrespecting” a police officer during lockdown. [2]
Numerous instances of police beating people for not wearing masks also emerged, while protesters at one point freed a woman from police arrest while cops were trying to handcuff her for not wearing a face covering. [2]
Early on during the first lockdown, police helicopters fitted with loudspeakers were also used to aggressively order beachgoers to go home. [2]
…More information is needed…
…More information is needed…
…More information is needed…
Spain’s Constitutional Court has ruled that the state of alarm that the central government implemented (Lockdown) in March 2020 at the outset of the coronavirus pandemic was unconstitutional. [1]
“While leaving intact most of the state of emergency’s terms, the court said that the key articles ordering the population off the streets except for shorts trips for shopping and unavoidable commutes for work and other official business were unconstitutional,” reports the Associated Press. [1]
“According to TVE, the ruling said that the limitations on movement violated citizens´ basic rights and therefore the state of emergency was insufficient to give them constitutional backing. The six magistrates said that a state of exception, which does allow the government to suspend basic rights, would have been necessary.” [1]
In order to legally limit people’s freedoms to the extent they did last year, the court said, the government would have had to declare a state of an exception rather than a state of emergency. [1]
The ruling leaves the door open for people who were fined for breaking the rules to reclaim the money they paid. [1]
But the court said it would not accept lawsuits from people and businesses who want to sue the government because they lost money due to the lockdown. [1]
The Spanish government may now face multiple lawsuits as a result of the lockdown being declared unlawful. [1]
…More information is needed…
……
source: ….
….
source: ….