IRMI Update Quiz
When is harm not an "occurrence"?
The Delaware Superior Court ruled that Meta was not entitled to a defense under its liability policies for thousands of lawsuits alleging that its social media platforms harmed children. Why did the court reach that conclusion?
A. The alleged injuries occurred outside the policy period.
B. The claims involved excluded cyber or technology risks.
C. The lawsuits did not allege an "occurrence" or accident under California law.
D. Meta failed to provide timely notice to its insurers.
Correct Answer: C. The court ruled that, under California law, the underlying lawsuits did not allege an "occurrence" or accident as required by the liability policies. The complaints asserted that Meta's platforms were intentionally designed to be addictive, making the alleged harm the result of intentional conduct, not an accident—no "occurrence," no defense. See the case summary in Insurance Law Essentials to learn more.
