Harvey Weinstein insurers don’t want to cover defence

Harvey Weinstein’s insurance company are refusing to pay for his sexual misconduct lawsuits.
Chubb Indemnity Insurance Co. filed a suit on Wednesday (28.02.18) in New York Supreme Court, to ask a judge for a declaration that they are not obliged to fund the producer’s defence in 11 lawsuits relating to a "pattern of intentional, egregious sexual predatory behaviour" over 30 years as they insist his alleged misconduct is not covered under their personal liability policies.
According to Variety, attorneys acting for the disgraced movie mogul have asked on several occasions for Chubb to commit to fund his legal bills as Weinstein has taken out 16 separate policies with them since 1994, including coverage for fine art and homeowner cover, some of which cover damages he must pay for "personal injury or property damage" following an "accident or offence".
However, the insurance company don’t believe the alleged assault and harassment would qualify for the cover.
They explained in legal documents: "The Underlying Lawsuits allege that the claimed damages arose out of Mr. Weinstein’s ongoing and pervasive, and allegedly criminal, acts of premeditated, forcible, nonconsensual sexual and physical assault, physical threats and abuse in the context of Weinstein’s invitation to his victims to discuss potential acting or producing roles in the film industry.
"Chubb advised Mr. Weinstein that such egregious, intentional acts by Mr. Weinstein do not constitute an ‘accident’ or an ‘offence.’ "
The suit claims the insurance policies also explicitly exclude coverage for "intentional acts".
The documents continued: "The damages alleged in the Underlying Lawsuits arose out of pre-meditated, forcible sexual assault, pervasive and egregious sexual harassment, physical assault and battery and other intentional and deliberate conduct by Mr. Weinstein.
"Mr. Weinstein’s acts were such that the consequences could and should have been foreseen by a reasonable person. Accordingly, Chubb declined coverage under the policies because the exclusion for ‘Intentional acts’ applies to bar coverage."