“contain”, “delay”, “research” and “mitigate”
“I want to repeat that everyone - everyone - must follow the advice to protect themselves and their families, but also - more importantly - to protect the wider public.”
“We’re also telling nightclubs, theatres, cinemas, gyms and leisure centres to close on the same timescale.”
“We shall indemnify You in respect of interruption or interference with the Business during the Indemnity Period following: a. any i. occurrence of a Notifiable Disease (as defined below) at the Premises or attributable to food or drink supplied from the Premises; ii. discovery of an organism at the Premises likely to result in the occurrence of a Notifiable Disease; iii. occurrence of a Notifiable Disease within a radius of 25 miles of the Premises; b. the discovery of vermin or pests at the Premises which causes restrictions on the use of the Premises on the order or advice of the competent local authority; c. any accident causing defects in the drains or other sanitary arrangements at the Premises which causes restrictions on the use of the Premises on the order or advice of the competent local authority; or d. any occurrence of murder or suicide at the Premises.”
“1. Notifiable Disease shall mean illness sustained by any person resulting from: i. food or drink poisoning; or ii. any human infectious or human contagious disease excluding Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or an AIDS related condition an outbreak of which the competent local authority has stipulated shall be notified to them.”
“Indemnity Period shall mean the period during which the results of the Business shall be affected in consequence of the occurrence discovery or accident beginning: i. in the case of a) and d) above with the date of the occurrence or discovery; or ii. in the case of b) and c) above the date from which the restrictions on the Premises applied; and ending not later than the Maximum Indemnity Period thereafter shown below. … We shall only be liable for the loss arising at those Premises which are directly affected by the occurrence discovery or accident. Maximum Indemnity Period shall mean three months.”
“any … occurrence of a Notifiable Disease within a radius of 25 miles of the Premises”
“the issues as to causation largely answer themselves.”
“There comes a point at which the court should remind itself that … to force upon the words a meaning which they cannot fairly bear is to substitute for the bargain actually made one which the court believes could better have been made. This is an illegitimate role for a court.”
“… there is cover under RSA 3 for any business interruption which an insured can show resulted from COVID-19 … from the date when the disease occurred in the relevant 25 mile radius of the insured premises.”
“Applicable to all sections other than section 5 - Employers’ Liability and section 6 - Public Liability Contamination or Pollution Clause a) The insurance by this Policy does not cover any loss or Damage due to contamination pollution soot deposition impairment with dust chemical precipitation adulteration poisoning impurity epidemic and disease or due to any limitation or prevention of the use of objects because of hazards to health. b) This exclusion does not apply if such loss or Damage arises out of one or more of the following Perils: • Fire, Lightning, Explosion, Impact of Aircraft • Vehicle Impact Sonic Boom • Accidental Escape of Water from any tank apparatus or pipe Riot, Civil Commotion, Malicious Damage • Storm, Hail Flood Inundation Earthquake • Landslide Subsidence Pressure of Snow, Avalanche Volcanic Eruption a)(bis) If a Peril not excluded from this Policy arises directly from Pollution and/or Contamination any loss or Damage arising directly from that Peril shall be covered. b)(bis) All other terms and conditions of this Policy shall be unaltered and especially the exclusions shall not be superseded by this clause.”
“[loss resulting from] interruption of or interference with the business arising from: (a) any human infectious or human contagious disease (excluding Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or an AIDS related condition) an outbreak of which the local authority has stipulated shall be notified to them manifested by any person whilst in the premises or within a twenty five (25) mile radius of it; (b) actual or suspected murder, suicide or sexual assault at the premises; (c) injury or illness sustained by any person arising from or traceable to foreign or injurious matter in food or drink provided in the premises; (d) vermin or pests in the premises; (e) the closing of the whole or part of the premises by order of a competent public authority consequent upon defect in the drains or other sanitary arrangements at the premises.”
“any human infectious or human contagious disease … on condition that and from the time when the disease is manifested by any person whilst in the premises or within a 25 mile radius of it.”
“Loss resulting from interruption of or interference with the business in consequence of any of the following events: a) any occurrence of a notifiable disease at the premises or attributable to food or drink supplied from the premises; b) any discovery of any organism at the premises likely to result in the occurrence of a notifiable disease; c) any occurrence of a notifiable disease within a radius of 25 miles of the premises; d) the discovery of vermin or pests at the premises which cause restrictions on the use of the premises on the order or advice of the competent local authority; e) any accident causing defects in the drains or other sanitary arrangements at the premises which causes restrictions on the use of the premises on the order of or advice of the competent local authority; f) any occurrence of murder or suicide at the premises; provided that the … h) insurer shall only be liable for loss arising at those premises which are directly subject to the incident; i) insurer’s maximum liability under this cover extension clause in respect of any one incident shall not exceed GBP 100,000 or 15% of the total sum insured (or limit of liability) for this insured section B, whichever is the lesser, any one claim and GBP 250,000 any one period of insurance.”
“… the period during which the results of the business shall be affected in consequence of the an [sic] event beginning in the case of: 3. 2.4(a) and (d) with the occurrence or discovery of the incident, 3. 2.4(b) and (c) above with the date from which the restrictions on the premises are applied, and ending not later than twelve (12) months thereafter.”
“Notifiable disease means illness sustained by any person resulting from: 18. 67.1 food or drink poisoning, or 18. 67.2 any human infectious or human contagious disease, an outbreak of which the competent local authority has stipulated shall be notified to them excluding Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), an AIDS related condition or avian influenza.”
“Given the reference to ‘events’, and taken with the nature of the other matters referred to in (a), (b) and (d) to (f), the emphasis in (c) appears to us in this clause not to be on the fact that the disease has occurred within 25 miles, but on the particular occurrences of the disease within the 25 miles. It is the ‘event’ which is constituted by the occurrence(s) of the disease within the 25-mile radius which must have caused the business interruption or interference.”
“an occurrence of any human infectious or human contagious disease, an outbreak of which must be notified to the local authority.”
“What is covered We will insure you for your financial losses and other items specified in the schedule, resulting solely and directly from an interruption to your activities caused by: … Public authority 13. your inability to use the insured premises due to restrictions imposed by a public authority during the period of insurance following: a. a murder or suicide; b. an occurrence of any human infectious or human contagious disease, an outbreak of which must be notified to the local authority; c. injury or illness of any person traceable to food or drink consumed on the insuredpremises; d. defects in the drains or other sanitary arrangements; e. vermin or pests at the insured premises.”
“… these words are used in the context of a resulting inability on the part of the insured to use its own premises. That reinforces the conclusion that what is being referred to is something that has the force of law. Each of paragraphs (a) to (e) of the ‘public authorities’ clause … is a case in which mandatory action can be taken by relevant authorities in respect of premises under identifiable legal or statutory powers, and the reference to ‘restrictions imposed’ most naturally refers to the legally binding powers that can be exercised in relation to those situations.”
“… such a police cordon would constitute a ‘restriction imposed’ in that it would be unlawful to cross it without proper excuse. Its effect would be to keep the public away, but it would not be directed either to the insured or to the insured’s use of the premises.”
“In our view this [phrase ‘inability to use’] plainly does not embrace any and every impairment of normal use. ‘Unable to use’ means something significantly different from ‘hindered in using’ or similar. Furthermore, the phrase is used in a context which includes the various sub-clauses (a) to (e) (in Hiscox 1), in each of which situations restrictions amounting to a complete inability to use the premises for the purposes of the business (albeit typically for a limited time) are readily foreseeable. We agree with Hiscox that there will not be an ‘inability to use’ premises merely because the insured cannot use all of them; and equally there will not be an ‘inability to use’ premises by reason of any and every departure from their normal use. Hiscox accepted, however, in our view correctly, that partial use might be sufficiently nugatory or vestigial as to amount to an ‘inability to use’ the premises. Whether that was so would depend on the facts of a particular case.”
“… ‘inability to use’ premises means what it says and is not to be equated with hindrance or disruption to normal use. Given the exceptions to regulation 6, which include the general exception of ‘reasonable excuse’ and the specifically enumerated exceptions including travel for the purposes of work where it was not reasonably possible for the person to work from home, and given the possibility (and reality) that businesses could operate or come to operate by contacting customers at home, it appears to us that the cases in which regulation 6 would have caused an ‘inability to use’ premises would be rare. Whether there were such cases would be a question of fact.”
“We will also indemnify You in respect of reduction in Turnover and increase in cost of working as insured under this section resulting from … Government or Local Authority Action Prevention of access to The Premises due to the actions or advice of a government or local authority due to an emergency which is likely to endanger life or property …”
“… unless the policy otherwise provides, the insurer is liable for any loss proximately caused by a peril insured against, but, subject as aforesaid, he is not liable for any loss which is not proximately caused by a peril insured against.”
“It would be the better for a little plain English.”
“It were infinite for the law to judge the cause of causes, and their impulsions one of another; therefore it contenteth itself with the immediate cause, and judgeth of the acts by that, without looking to any further degree.”
“What does ‘proximate’ here mean? To treat proximate cause as if it was the cause which is proximate in time is … out of the question. The cause which is truly proximate is that which is proximate in efficiency. That efficiency may have been preserved although other causes may meantime have sprung up which have yet not destroyed it, or truly impaired it, and it may culminate in a result of which it still remains the real efficient cause to which the event can be ascribed.”
“… I think the case turns on a pure question of fact to be determined by common-sense principles. What was the cause of the loss of the ship? I do not think the ordinary man would have any difficulty in answering she was lost because she was torpedoed.”
“This choice of the real or efficient cause from out of the whole complex of the facts must be made by applying common sense standards. Causation is to be understood as the man in the street, and not as either the scientist or the metaphysician, would understand it. Cause here means what a business or seafaring man would take to be the cause without too microscopic analysis but on a broad view.”
“it is no answer to a claim under a policy that covers one cause of a loss that the loss was also due to another cause that was not so covered.”
“The basic, fundamental, threshold test for any factual causation inquiry is the ‘but for’ test. X cannot be a cause of Y if Y would in any event have occurred irrespective of - but for - X.”
“… even if some investigation and defence costs can be seen to be referable to both a claim in respect of which there is indemnity and a claim in respect of which there is not, the insureds are entitled to such costs because they fall into an indemnity, otherwise untouched in its operation by any exclusion.”
“Once it is shown that an insured has on a conventional basis incurred defence costs which are covered on the face of the policy wording, there is, as the New Zealand Forest case[1997] 1 WLR 1237 shows, no reason to construe the wording as requiring some diminution in the insured’s recovery, merely because the defence costs so incurred also benefited some other uninsured defendant.”
“Yet the teaspoon of water and the match contributed to and are part of the flood and forest fire, respectively. What if the same flood or fire were caused by a million (or many more) different people all contributing a teaspoonful of water or a single match? Denying that any of the teaspoonfuls or matches contributed to the destruction of the property that was destroyed by the flood or fire would leave its destruction as an unexplained, non-caused miracle. As a pure matter of causation, it cannot possibly matter whose hands supplied the different bits of water, flame or fuel. What is driving the intuition of no causation is the judgment regarding attributable responsibility, which is especially brought to mind if the question is posed as ‘Did the teaspoon of water or match destroy the property?’ rather than ‘Did the teaspoon of water or match contribute, even if only extremely minimally, to the flood or fire that destroyed the property?’ What is generally agreed upon is that the trivial contributor should not be held liable when her contribution was trivial in comparison to the other contributing conditions and was neither strongly necessary nor independently strongly sufficient for the injury at issue, but this is a normative issue of attributable responsibility rather than causal contribution.”
“… it does not appear to us that the causation requirement could be satisfied on the basis that the cases within the area were to be regarded as … one of many independent causes each of which was an effective cause, because this clause, in our view, limits cover only to the consequences of specific events.”
“… we consider that the exercise must give effect to the insurance effected. This means assuming that the insured peril did not occur. The insured peril is a composite one, involving three interconnected elements: (i) inability to use the insured premises (ii) due to restrictions imposed by a public authority (iii) ‘following’ one of (a) to (e), relevantly (b) an occurrence of an infectious or contagious disease. What the insured is covering itself against is, we consider, the fortuity of being in a situation in which all those elements are present. In answering the counterfactual question as to what would have been the position of the insured’s business but for the occurrence of the insured peril, it is accordingly necessary to strip out all three interconnected elements, including in this instance the national outbreak of COVID-19.”
“… the approach advocated by the insurers of stripping out the government restrictions etc and their immediate effect … whilst leaving the pandemic and its economic and social effects is entirely artificial and ignores the inextricable connection between the various elements of the insured peril, both as a matter of legal analysis and as a matter of practical reality, given the nature of the pandemic emergency.”
“There is no intention under this policy to exclude loss directly caused by a warning concerning terrorist activities just because it can also be said that the loss was also directly and concurrently caused by the underlying terrorist activities themselves.”
“Business trends The amount wepay for loss of gross profit will be amended to reflect any special circumstances or business trends affecting your business, either before or after the loss, in order that the amount paid reflects as near as possible, the result that would have been achieved if the damage had not occurred.”
“Rate of Gross Profit and Standard Turnover may be adjusted to reflect any trends or circumstances which (i) affect The Business before or after the Prevention of access to The Premises due to the actions or advice of a government … due to an emergency which is likely to endanger life [or] (ii) would have affected The Business had the Prevention of access to The Premises due to the actions or advice of a government … due to an emergency which is likely to endanger life not occurred. The adjusted figures will represent, as near as possible, the results which would have been achieved during the same period had the Prevention of access to The Premises due to the actions or advice of a government … due to an emergency which is likely to endanger life not occurred.”
“… part of the machinery for calculating the business interruption loss on the basis that there is a qualifying insured peril. Where the policyholder has therefore prima facieestablished a loss caused by an insured peril, it would seem contrary to principle, unless the policy wording so requires, for that loss to be limited by the inclusion of any part of the insured peril in the assessment of what the position would have been if the insured peril had not occurred.”
“… the whole basis of our scheme consists of a comparison of the abnormal with the normal. And the only abnormality with which we are concerned is that brought about by the fire. It may be that the period which we select as representative of the normal is itself abnormal fromcircumstances unconnected with the fire. Similarly, the depletion of turnover after the fire may have been aggravated or partially hidden by factors quite independent of the fire. Any untoward event, such as a breakdown of machinery, a flooding of works, or a strike of employees, whether it occurs before or after the fire, may have the effect of upsetting our calculations.”
“… such adjustments shall be made as may be necessary to provide for the trend of the business and for variations in or special circumstances affecting the business either before or after the damage or which would have affected the business had the damage not occurred, so that the figures thus adjusted shall represent as nearly as may be reasonably practicable the results which but for the damage would have been obtained during the relative period after the damage.”
“[The clause] takes in not only special circumstances affecting the business (such as strikes and other spectacular occurrences) but ‘the trend of the business’ - its natural growth or diminution - and any variations in it, either before or after the damage.”
“It is important to bear in mind that the indemnity in respect of reduction in turnover is qualified by the words ‘in consequence of the damage.’ If, therefore, the reduction is attributable wholly or in part to causes not connected with the damage which would have affected turnover irrespective of the damage having taken place, an adjustment must be made to the figure of standard turnover in order to reflect as accurately as possible the loss solely due to the damage.”
“Imperial Palace asserts that Catlin asks us to interpret the business interruption provision in such a way that the phrase ‘had no loss occurred’ morphs into ‘had no occurrence occurred’. Imperial Palace argues that instead, we should disentangle the loss from the occurrence and determine loss based on a hypothetical in which Hurricane Katrina hit Mississippi, damaged all of Imperial Palace’s competitors, but left Imperial Palace intact: the occurrence occurred, but the loss did not. While we agree with Imperial Palace that the loss is distinct from the occurrence - at least in theory - we also believe that the two are inextricably intertwined under the language of the business-interruption provision. Without language in the policy instructing us to do so, we decline to interpret the business-interruption provision in such a way that the loss caused by Hurricane Katrina can be distinguished from the occurrence of Hurricane Katrina itself.”
“If there was a measurable downturn in the turnover of a business due to COVID-19 before the insured peril was triggered, then it is in principle appropriate … for the counterfactual to take into account the continuation of that measurable downturn and/or increase in expenses as a trend or circumstance (under a trends clause or similar) in calculating the indemnity payable in respect of the period during which the insured peril was triggered and remained operative.”
“… requires OEH to establish that the cause of the loss claimed is the Damage to the Hotel. It is not necessary or relevant for this purpose to go behind the Damage and consider whether the event which caused the Damage also caused damage to other property in the City: the fact that there was other damage which resulted from the same cause does not bring the consequences of such damage within the scope of the cover.”
“… the language of the Trends clause is, the Tribunal thinks, conclusive. This clause specifically requires the business interruption loss to be assessed by reference to the results which ‘but for the Damage’ (ie the damage to the Hotel) would have obtained during the relevant period. It is accordingly irrelevant whether there was a concurrent cause of any such losses.”
“(1) Whether on its true construction, the policy provides cover in respect of loss which was concurrently caused by: (i) physical damage to the property; and (ii) damage to or consequent loss of attraction of the surrounding area; (2) Whether on the true construction of the policy, the same event(s) which cause the damage to the insured property which gives rise to the business interruption loss are also capable of being or giving rise to ‘special circumstances’ for the purposes of allowing an adjustment of the same business interruption loss within the scope of the ‘Trends clause’.”
“57. I agree with the tribunal that the clause is concerned only with the damage, not with the causes of the damage. What is covered are business interruption losses caused by damage, not business interruption losses caused by damage or ‘other damage which resulted from the same cause’. Nowhere in the Trends clause does it state that ‘variations or special circumstances affecting the Business either before or after the Damage or which would have affected the Business had the Damage not occurred’ has to be something completely unconnected with the damage in the sense that it had an independent cause to the cause of the damage. The assumption required to be made under the Trends clause is ‘had the Damage not occurred’; not ‘had the Damage and whatever event caused the Damage not occurred’. 58. I agree with Generali that OEH’s construction effectively requires words to be read into the clause or for it to be re-drafted. Further, such a re-drafting of the Trends Clause, which would allow OEH to recover for the loss in gross operating profit suffered as a result of the occurrence of the insured event (ie the hurricanes) as opposed to the loss suffered as a result of the damage to the hotel, is inconsistent with the causation requirement of the main insuring clause which OEH accepts requires proof that the losses claimed were caused by damage to the hotel.”
“Precedent, however, is not lacking for ways by which a judge may recede from a prior opinion that has proven untenable and perhaps misled others. See Chief Justice Taney, License Cases, 5 How 504, recanting views he had pressed upon the Court as Attorney General of Maryland in Brown v Maryland, 12 Wheat 419. Baron Bramwell extricated himself from a somewhat similar embarrassment by saying, ‘The matter does not appear to me now as it appears to have appeared to me then.’ Andrew v Styrap, 26 LTR (NS) 704, 706. And Mr Justice Story, accounting for his contradiction of his own former opinion, quite properly put the matter: ‘My own error, however, can furnish no ground for its being adopted by this Court. ...’ United States v Gooding, 12 Wheat 460, 25 US 478. Perhaps Dr Johnson really went to the heart of the matter when he explained a blunder in his dictionary - ‘Ignorance, sir, ignorance.’ But an escape less self-depreciating was taken by Lord Westbury, who, it is said, rebuffed a barrister’s reliance upon an earlier opinion of his Lordship: ‘I can only say that I am amazed that a man of my intelligence should have been guilty of giving such an opinion.’ If there are other ways of gracefully and good naturedly surrendering former views to a better considered position, I invoke them all.”
“Last week we asked everyone to stay at home if you had one of two key symptoms: a high temperature or a new and continuous cough. Today, we need to go further, because according to SAGE it looks as though we’re now approaching the fast growth part of the upward curve. And without drastic action, cases could double every five or six days. So, first, we need to ask you to ensure that if you or anyone in your household has one of those two symptoms, then you should stay at home for 14 days. That means that if possible you should not go out even to buy food or essentials, other than for exercise, and in that case at a safe distance from others. If necessary, you should ask for help from others for your daily necessities. And if that is not possible, then you should do what you can to limit your social contact when you leave the house to get supplies. And even if you don’t have symptoms and if no one in your household has symptoms, there is more that we need you to do now. So, second, now is the time for everyone to stop non-essential contact with others and to stop all unnecessary travel. We need people to start working from home where they possibly can. And you should avoid pubs, clubs, theatres and other such social venues. It goes without saying, we should all only use the NHS when we really need to. And please go online rather than ringing NHS 111. Now, this advice about avoiding all unnecessary social contact, is particularly important for people over 70, for pregnant women and for those with some health conditions … So third, in a few days’ time - by this coming weekend - it will be necessary to go further and to ensure that those with the most serious health conditions are largely shielded from social contact for around 12 weeks … And it’s now clear that the peak of the epidemic is coming faster in some parts of the country than in others. And it looks as though London is now a few weeks ahead. So, to relieve the pressure on the London health system and to slow the spread in London, it’s important that Londoners now pay special attention to what we are saying about avoiding non-essential contact, and to take particularly seriously the advice about working from home, and avoiding confined spaces such as pubs and restaurants. Lastly, it remains true as we have said in the last few weeks that risks of transmission of the disease at mass gatherings such as sporting events are relatively low. But obviously, logically as we advise against unnecessary social contact of all kinds, it is right that we should extend this advice to mass gatherings as well. And so we’ve also got to ensure that we have the critical workers we need, that might otherwise be deployed at those gatherings, to deal with this emergency. So from tomorrow, we will no longer be supporting mass gatherings with emergency workers in the way that we normally do. So mass gatherings, we are now moving emphatically away from.”
“I want to repeat that everyone - everyone - must follow the advice to protect themselves and their families, but also - more importantly - to protect the wider public. So stay at home for seven days if you think you have the symptoms. Remember the two key symptoms are high temperature, a continuous new cough. Whole household to stay at home for 14 days if one member in that household thinks he/she has the symptoms. Avoid all unnecessary gatherings - pubs, clubs, bars, restaurants, theatres and so on and work from home if you can. Wash your hands. … And we come today to the key issue of schools where we have been consistently advised that there is an important trade off. … So looking at the curve of the disease and looking at where we are now - we think now that we must apply downward pressure, further downward pressure on that upward curve by closing the schools. So I can announce today and Gavin Williamson making statement now in House of Commons that after schools shut their gates from Friday afternoon, they will remain closed for most pupils - for the vast majority of pupils - until further notice. I will explain what I mean by the vast majority of pupils. The objective is to slow the spread of the virus and we judge it is the right moment to do that. But of course, as I’ve always said, we also need to keep the NHS going and to treat the number of rising cases. So we need health workers who are also parents to continue to go to work. And we need other critical workers with children to keep doing their jobs too - from police officers who are keeping us safe to the supermarket delivery drivers, social care workers who look after the elderly and who are so vital. We will be setting out more details shortly about who we mean in these groups. So we therefore need schools to make provision for the children of these key workers who would otherwise be forced to stay home. And they will also need to look after the most vulnerable children. This will mean there will of course be are far fewer children in schools and that will help us to slow the spread of the disease. … So we are simultaneously asking nurseries and private schools to do the same, and we are providing financial support where it is needed. …”
“… I want to thank everyone for following the guidance we issued on Monday: To stay at home for seven days if you think you have the symptoms, for 14 days if anyone in your household has either of the symptoms - a new continuous cough or a high temperature. To avoid pubs bars, clubs and restaurants. To work from home if at all possible. Keep washing your hands … … I am confident that, in time, the UK economy is going to bounce back. Of course it is. But I must be absolutely clear with you: the speed of that eventual recovery depends entirely on our ability, our collective ability, to get on top of the virus now. And that means we have to take the next steps, on scientific advice and following our plan, we are strengthening the measures announced on Monday which you will remember. And of course people have already made a huge effort to comply with those measures for avoiding unnecessary social contact. But we need now to push down further on that curve of transmission between us. And so following agreement between all the formations of the United Kingdom, all the devolved administrations, we are collectively telling, telling cafes, pubs, bars, restaurants to close tonight as soon as they reasonably can, and not to open tomorrow. Though to be clear, they can continue to provide take-out services. We’re also telling nightclubs, theatres, cinemas, gyms and leisure centres to close on the same timescale. Now, these are places where people come together, and indeed the whole purpose of these businesses is to bring people together. But the sad things [sic] is that today for now, at least physically, we need to keep people apart. And I want to stress that we will review the situation each month, to see if we can relax any of these measures. And listening to what I have just said, some people may of course be tempted to go out tonight. But please don’t. You may think you are invincible, but there is no guarantee you will get mild symptoms, and you can still be a carrier of the disease and pass it on to others. So that’s why, as far as possible, we want you to stay at home, that’s how we can protect our NHS and save lives.”
“Requirement to close premises and businesses during the emergency 2(1) A person who is responsible for carrying on a business which is listed in Part 1 of the Schedule must - (a) during the relevant period - (i) close any premises, or part of the premises, in which food or drink are sold for consumption on those premises, and (ii) cease selling food or drink for consumption on its premises; or (b) if the business sells food or drink for consumption off the premises, cease selling food or drink for consumption on its premises during the relevant period. (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), food or drink sold by a hotel or other accommodation as part of room service is not to be treated as being sold for consumption on its premises. (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a)(ii) and (b), an area adjacent to the premises of the business where seating is made available for customers of the business (whether or not by the business) to be treated as part of the premises of that business. (4) A person responsible for carrying on a business which is listed in Part 2 of the Schedule must cease to carry on that business during the relevant period. (5) If a business listed in the Schedule (‘business A’) forms part of a larger business (‘business B’), the person responsible for carrying on business B complies with the requirement in paragraph (1) if it closes down business A. (6) The Secretary of State must review the need for restrictions imposed by this regulation every 28 days, with the first review being carried out before the expiry of the period of 28 days starting with the day after the day on which these Regulations are made. (7) As soon as the Secretary of State considers that the restrictions set out in this regulation are no longer necessary to prevent, protect against, control or provide a public health response to the incidence or spread of infection in England with the coronavirus, the Secretary of State must publish a direction terminating the relevant period. (8) A direction published under paragraph (7) may terminate the relevant period in relation to some of the businesses listed in the Schedule, or all businesses listed in the Schedule. (9) For the purposes of this regulation - (a) ‘coronavirus’ means severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2); (b) a ‘person responsible for carrying on a business’ includes the owner, proprietor, and manager of that business; (c) the ‘relevant period’ starts when these Regulations come into force and ends on the day specified in a direction published by the Secretary of State under paragraph (7).”
“it’s vital to slow the spread of the disease ... And that’s why we have been asking people to stay at home during this pandemic. And though huge numbers are complying - and I thank you all - the time has now come for us all to do more. From this evening I must give the British people a very simple instruction - you must stay at home. Because the critical thing we must do is stop the disease spreading between households. That is why people will only be allowed to leave their home for the following very limited purposes: - shopping for basic necessities, as infrequently as possible; - one form of exercise a day - for example a run, walk, or cycle - alone or with members of your household; - any medical need, to provide care or to help a vulnerable person; and - travelling to and from work, but only where this is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home. That’s all - these are the only reasons you should leave your home. You should not be meeting friends. If your friends ask you to meet, you should say No. You should not be meeting family members who do not live in your home. You should not be going shopping except for essentials like food and medicine - and you should do this as little as you can. And use food delivery services where you can. If you don’t follow the rules the police will have the powers to enforce them, including through fines and dispersing gatherings. To ensure compliance with the Government’s instruction to stay at home, we will immediately: - close all shops selling non-essential goods, including clothing and electronic stores and other premises including libraries, playgrounds and outdoor gyms, and places of worship; - we will stop all gatherings of more than two people in public - excluding people you live with; - and we’ll stop all social events, including weddings, baptisms and other ceremonies, but excluding funerals. Parks will remain open for exercise but gatherings will be dispersed. No Prime Minister wants to enact measures like this. I know the damage that this disruption is doing and will do to people’s lives, to their businesses and to their jobs. And that’s why we have produced a huge and unprecedented programme of support both for workers and for business. And I can assure you that we will keep these restrictions under constant review. We will look again in three weeks, and relax them if the evidence shows we are able to.”
“Requirement to close premises and businesses during the emergency 4(1) A person responsible for carrying on a business which is listed in Part 1 of Schedule 2 must - (a) during the emergency period - (i) close any premises, or part of the premises, in which food or drink are sold for consumption on those premises, and (ii) cease selling food or drink for consumption on its premises; or (b) if the business sells food or drink for consumption off the premises, cease selling food or drink for consumption on its premises during the emergency period. (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), food or drink sold by a hotel or other accommodation as part of room service is not to be treated as being sold for consumption on its premises. (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a)(ii) and (b), an area adjacent to the premises of the business where seating is made available for customers of the business (whether or not by the business) is to be treated as part of the premises of that business. (4) A person responsible for carrying on a business or providing a service which is listed in Part 2 of Schedule 2 must cease to carry on that business or to provide that service during the emergency period. (5) Paragraph (4) does not prevent the use of - (a) premises used for the businesses or services listed in paragraphs 5, 6, 8, 9 or 10 of that Part to broadcast a performance to people outside the premises, whether over the internet or as part of a radio or television broadcast; (b) any suitable premises used for the businesses or services listed in that Schedule to host blood donation sessions. (6) If a business listed in Part 1 or 2 of Schedule 2 (‘business A’) forms part of a larger business (‘business B’), the person responsible for carrying on business B complies with the requirement in paragraph (1) if it closes down business A.”
“PART 1 1. Restaurants, including restaurants and dining rooms in hotels or members’ clubs. 2(1) Cafes, including workplace canteens (subject to sub-paragraph (2)) but not including - (a) cafes or canteens at a hospital, care home or school; (b) canteens at a prison or an establishment intended for use for naval, military or air force purposes or for the purposes of the Department of the Secretary of State responsible for defence; (c) services providing food or drink to the homeless. (2) Workplace canteens may remain open where there is no practical alternative for staff at that workplace to obtain food. 3. Bars, including bars in hotels or members’ clubs. 4. Public houses. PART 2 5. Cinemas. 6. Theatres. 7. Nightclubs. 8. Bingo halls. 9. Concert halls. 10. Museums and galleries. 11. Casinos. 12. Betting shops. 13. Spas. 14. Nail, beauty, hair salons and barbers. 15. Massage parlours. 16. Tattoo and piercing parlours. 17. Skating rinks. 18. Indoor fitness studios, gyms, swimming pools, bowling alleys, amusement arcades or soft play areas or other indoor leisure centres or facilities. 19. Funfairs (whether outdoors or indoors). 20. Playgrounds, sports courts and outdoor gyms. 21. Outdoor markets (except for stalls selling food). 22. Car showrooms. 23. Auction Houses. PART 3 24. Food retailers, including food markets, supermarkets, convenience stores and corner shops. 25. Off licenses and licensed shops selling alcohol (including breweries). 26. Pharmacies (including non-dispensing pharmacies) and chemists. 27. Newsagents. 28. Homeware, building supplies and hardware stores. 29. Petrol stations. 30. Car repair and MOT services. 31. Bicycle shops. 32. Taxi or vehicle hire businesses. 33. Banks, building societies, credit unions, short term loan providers and cash points. 34. Post offices. 35. Funeral directors. 36. Laundrettes and dry cleaners. 37. Dental services, opticians, audiology services, chiropody, chiropractors, osteopaths and other medical or health services, including services relating to mental health. 38. Veterinary surgeons and pet shops. 39. Agricultural supplies shops. 40. Storage and distribution facilities, including delivery drop off or collection points, where the facilities are in the premises of a business included in this Part. 41. Car parks. 42. Public toilets.”
Showing the 50 most senior of 77.