Facts
The [A. AG] (appellant) and the [B. AG] (respondent) concluded two insurance contracts, in which the [A. AG] insured the liability of the [B. AG] and its subsidiaries. The [B. AG] and its subsidiaries were sued in various proceedings for damages. The [A. AG] refused to take over the costs for the defense of these claims.
The Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich ruled that the [A. AG] is fundamentally obliged to take over the costs for the legal representation of the [B. AG] and its subsidiaries. The [A. AG] lodged an appeal, claiming that the lower court had incorrectly interpreted the coverage exclusions in the insurance contracts.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the interpretation of the coverage exclusions in the insurance contracts and came to the conclusion that the lower court had correctly interpreted them. The coverage exclusions refer to damages whose occurrence could have been expected with high probability by the representatives of the policyholder and the co-insured companies.
The Federal Court found that the [A. AG] had not sufficiently substantiated that the respondent or its subsidiaries had acted intentionally or with conditional intent. The [A. AG] had also not proven that the respondent or its subsidiaries had acted against their better knowledge.
The Federal Court also came to the conclusion that the lower court had not…