Traditional war exclusion clauses may not automatically apply to cyberattacks. Courts may interpret such clauses narrowly if policy language does not explicitly address cyber operations.
The Merck litigation has become a landmark precedent in cyber insurance law. The case illustrates how ambiguities in insurance policy wording may lead courts to favor policyholders.
The insurance market is revising cyber policy language. Following the Merck decision, insurers—particularly within the Lloyd’s market—have introduced clearer exclusions for state-backed cyber operations.
Businesses should carefully review cyber insurance coverage. Companies should ensure that policy terms align with their cyber risk exposure and form part of a broader cyber risk management strategy.
Introduction
As corporate operations increasingly rely on digital systems and online services, the risks of operational disruption, data breaches, and financial losses caused by cyberattacks continue to grow. To mitigate the impact of such risks, companies have increasingly turned to cyber insurance as a risk transfer mechanism. In recent years, the global cyber insurance market has expanded rapidly, reflecting the rising demand among businesses for more robust cyber risk management strategies.
However, when cyberattacks involve nation-states or state-sponsored actors, the provisions of traditional insurance policies are often difficult to apply directly, which may lead to significant coverage disputes. The insurance litigation involving the U.S. pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. arising from the 2017 NotPetya cyberattack represents one of the most notable cases illustrating these issues.
This case has not only influenced the drafting of cyber insurance policy terms but has also prompted the legal community to reexamine the applicability of war exclusion clauses in the digital era.
The NotPetya Attack and the Merck Coverage Dispute
The NotPetya malware attack, which erupted in June 2017, initially targeted Ukrainian government agencies and businesses but quickly spread worldwide, affecting numerous multinational companies, including shipping company Maersk, logistics firm FedEx, and pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck.
As a result of the attack, approximately 40,000 of Merck’s computer systems were rendered inoperable, causing significant disruptions to production and supply chains. The company estimated its total losses at approximately USD 1.4 billion.
Merck subsequently filed insurance claims under its Property All Risks insurance policies. However, several insurers denied coverage based on the policy’s “Hostile or Warlike Action Exclusion”, arguing that the NotPetya attack was a cyber operation supported by Russia and therefore constituted a hostile state action excluded under the policy.
Impact on the Cyber Insurance Market
Following the Merck litigation, the global insurance market began reassessing the drafting of cyber insurance policy provisions.
In particular, Lloyd’s of London introduced new requirements beginning in 2023, mandating that market participants clearly define exclusions for state-backed cyberattacks in cyber insurance policies and establish mechanisms for attributing cyber incidents. These measures aim to reduce the systemic risks posed by large-scale cyber incidents.
These developments reflect a broader effort by insurers to clarify policy wording and reduce uncertainty in cyber coverage disputes.
Conclusion: Risk Management Considerations for Businesses
The Merck case highlights the limitations of traditional insurance policy language when applied to modern digital conflicts and has prompted the insurance market to reconsider how cyber insurance policies allocate risk.
As cyberattacks become increasingly frequent and sophisticated, companies should adopt a comprehensive approach to cyber risk management. In addition to strengthening cybersecurity protections, businesses should carefully review and evaluate cyber insurance policy terms to ensure that adequate coverage is available in the event of major cyber incidents.
Looking ahead, as legal practice and the insurance market continue to evolve, the cyber insurance framework is expected to develop clearer legal standards and contractual structures to address emerging risks in the digital age.