US COVERAGE DISPUTE: SIXTH CIRCUIT FINDS PRIOR KNOWLEDGE FATAL TO CLAIMS-MADE INSURANCE POLICY
Brief background
The insured applied for a claims-made professional liability policy and answered “No” to a question asking whether it was aware of any circumstances that might result in a claim. Prior to the application, the insured had received multiple complaints from a customer regarding defective equipment and had internally acknowledged the issues. The insurer denied coverage when a lawsuit was later filed, citing the prior-knowledge exclusion in the policy.
Issue for determination
The court was called upon to decide whether an insured was entitled to coverage under a professional liability insurance policy despite having prior knowledge of circumstances that could reasonably give rise to a claim.
Discussion
The policy contained a prior-knowledge exclusion, which barred coverage for any claim arising from circumstances known to the insured before the policy’s inception that could reasonably be expected to result in a claim. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favour of the insurer, holding that the insured’s prior knowledge of the dispute precluded coverage.
Court’s reasoning
The court applied Michigan law, which enforces the plain language of insurance contracts. It found that the insured had actual knowledge of the potential claim before the policy was issued. The exclusion was clear and unambiguous, and the insurer was entitled to rely on the insured’s representations in the application. The insured’s attempt to characterise the issue as a minor dispute or the fault of a third party was rejected.
Conclusion
Disclosure obligations during the insurance application process are critical; failure to disclose known risks can void coverage. Courts will enforce prior-knowledge exclusions strictly, especially in claims-made policies. Insureds must carefully assess whether any known circumstances could reasonably lead to a claim and disclose them accordingly.

Mtho Maphumulo
When the Workplace is Not Enough: Coida, Co-Employee Negligence and the Limits of the Employer's Statutory Shield
Introduction The Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act 130 of 1993 (“COIDA”) has long been understood as a trade-off: employees receive no-fault statutory compensation fo...
November 09 2026
Serving Up Liability: Negligence, Res Ipsa Loquitur and Defective Food
The respondent went out to dinner with her husband at a restaurant run by the appellant, and both of them ordered hamburgers. Halfway through her meal she felt something stuck in her throat. She cough...
October 20 2026
Year-End Functions and the Question of Liability: What Employers and Insurers Should Consider
As the festive season approaches and offices across South Africa gear up for year-end celebrations, employers would do well to pause before popping the champagne. Behind the glitter and goodwill of th...
October 07 2026

