1

How to interpret following language from business liability insurance policy with respect to coverage trigger for advertising injury:

  1. "Personal and advertising injury" means injury, including consequential "bodily injury", arising out of one or more of the following offenses:

a. False arrest, detention or imprisonment;

b. Malicious prosecution;

c. The wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor;

d. Oral or written publication, in any manner, of material that slanders or libels a person or organization or disparages a person's or organization's goods, products or services;

e. Oral or written publication, in any manner, of material that violates a person's right of privacy;

f. The use of another's advertising idea in your "advertisement"; or

g. Infringing upon another's copyright, trade dress or slogan in your "advertisement".

First, I am perplexed about point b. Malicious prosecution;. Would it trigger coverage when:

  1. the insured is accused of Malicious prosecution; or
  2. the insured is victim of Malicious prosecution?

Second, if it is really #1, then wouldn't it be moral hazard in sense that insurance company would come to defend "bad guys" who are accused for "Malicious prosecution", "False arrests" when they file dubious lawsuits? Or are triggers mentioned in a. and b. actually for public benefit that are just not obvious to me?

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.