The Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) regulates insurers and other financial service providers, but does not interfere with civil law matters pertaining to policy coverage.
Unsurprisingly, the AFM has not released a statement about contractual uncertainty around the validity of BI claims.
However, the Dutch market seems broadly unanimous: damage due to the coronavirus is in principle not covered by BI insurance.
The Dutch Association of Insurers specifically points out that in this case the government is taking measures to help businesses (https://www.verzekeraars.nl/verzekeringsthemas/nieuwe-risicos/coronavirus).
In principle, business damage is only covered by BI insurance if there is material damage to insured property (such as real estate or inventory), caused by a risk specified in the policy conditions (“named peril”).
In general, damage due to BI as a result of the coronavirus does not qualify as material damage to property, or as a named peril, and is therefore not covered.
To our knowledge, there are no insured – yet – who have tried to challenge a denial of BI insurance coverage in court.
We have not found any judgments to that effect.
It is possible that there might be cases currently still pending - the existence of a case is generally not known to the wider public before a judgment is rendered (unless the case is picked up by the media).
The regulator is the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM).
Article of interest regarding insurance coverage during the corona crisis:
Dutch Association of Insurers
Article of interest (FAQ) on BI claims during the corona crisis:
Marieke van den Heuvel