On 9 February 2022, the Federal Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court’s judgment dismissing a claim filed by a policy holder who had argued that his insurer breached its contract insofar as it failed to pay him for having cancelled his flight because of government-imposed COVID-19 stay-at-home orders.
On 25 February 2022, the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ([2022] EWHC 409 (Comm), Case No. CL-2021-000235) held that an insurance policyholders were entitled to compensation from its insurer due to the forced closure of its many well-known restaurants and cafés in London during the three lockdowns in March, September, and November 2020.
The First Federal Civil Court of the State of Goiàs declared the measure imposing vaccination for employees of the Federal Public Defender's Office partially null and void. The Court noted that the purpose of the measure was to impose sanctions as a form of coercion on those who decide not to vaccinate against COVID-19, rather than to protect the employees' health.
On 27 January 2022, the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (case n° PSA/2022/17) dismissed the appeal brought by an employee, finding that the decision not to grant her an exemption from vaccination was fair and reasonable on the basis that vaccine hesitancy and conscientious objection do not constitute a reason not to take the vaccine.
On 26 January 2022, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) withdrew the COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) which provided for a vaccine or test-mandate for employers with at least 100 employees. The above rule had been temporarily suspended by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On 25 February 2022, the High Court of New Zealand upheld the claim. It found that the mandate affected only a small number of unvaccinated personnel (164 out of 15,480 personnel) and that there was no evidence that the effect of the Order on the small number of personnel made any material difference to the continuity of Police or Defence Force services. On such grounds, the Court concluded that the measure constituted an unreasonable limit on the claimants’ rights.
By judgment of 15 February 2022, a justice of the Court of Appeal of Massachusetts upheld the appeal filed by the unions and suspended the vaccine mandate for employees of the city of Boston, and the ensuing risk of termination for unvaccinated employees.
On 3 September 2021, the Secretary of the United States Air Force issued a mandate requiring all active-duty service members of the Air Force, unless exempted, to be fully vaccinated by 2 November 2021. With a judgment of 15 February 2022, a judge of the District Court for the Middle District of Georgia granted a motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by a female Air Force officer who had alleged that such a rule violated her religious freedom.
On 6 March 2020, a Maltese inmate had filed an application before the European Court of Human Rights claiming, inter alia, that his conditions of detention during the pandemic amounted to an inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and that the State failed to take adequate measures to protect him from contracting COVID-19 in prison.
By decision of 23 February 2022, the Council of State dismissed a challenge to the measures mandating proof of vaccination to participate to certain public and social activities. It found that the President is competent to preserve public order and that the Head of State and Ministers are responsible for adopting all the necessary measures related to the pandemic.
On January 4, 2022, the Seoul Administrative Court exempted private educational facilities from the obligation to submit the compulsory vaccination certificate for COVID-19. This is the first judgment issued regarding compulsory vaccination introduced for the population aged 12 and over at the beginning of January, against which numerous associations of teachers and parents concerned about possible side effects have appealed.
On 30 March 2020, the American Civil Liberties Union for the District of Columbia (ACLU-DC) and the Public Defender Service for same District filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all the detainees in the jails of the District of Columbia alleging that the competent Department of Corrections (also referred to as "DOC") was not adequately addressing the risk of mass contagion from COVID-19 in prison.
On 9 February 2022 (res. no. 2022002924), the Court found that the refusal to administer the vaccine was due to a misinterpretation by the authorities of the provisions regarding the event of loss of the vaccination card.
On 24 January 2022, the First Instance Court of Le Havre (N°RG 21/00431) held that there were no extraordinary circumstances in the sense of the EU’s Travel Package Directive allowing the applicants to claim a refund of their trip to Egypt in mid-March 2020.
The Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta dismissed an application for an emergency injunction against Alberta’s decision to eliminate mask mandates for school-aged children, and found that there was no evidence of irreparable harm to immunocompromised children’s health in lifting the masking mandate.
On 27 January 2022, the Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg (1 S 89/22) held that the State government had to consider the 7-day hospitalization incidence when designing regulation about its alert levels and access by non-immunized people to commercial and services establishments, amid the omicron wave of the coronavirus.
On 12 January 2022, the Court of Appeal of Santiago dismissed an appeal and found that confidentiality clauses in a contract for the acquisition of vaccines cannot constitute an exception to the principle of publicity enshrined in article 8 of the Political Constitution.
On 10 February 2022, the Supreme Court of Zurich ordered the owner of a small enterprise to pay back an emergency loan he had obtained from the federal government, after he had made false claims over the turnover of his small construction company in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.
By decision of 4 February 2022, the Ninth Collegiate Tribunal in Criminal Matters found that preventing detainees from meeting their lawyers constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 8 and 20 of the Mexican Constitution, Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
On 1 February 2022, the High Court of Amakueni (case no. 70 of 2019), granted the appeal filed to obtain an extension of the suspension of the execution orders to address the health emergency.
On 14 February 2022, the Fourth Collegiate Tribunal in Administrative Matters for the First Circuit found that the State’s decision not to vaccinate children aged 5-11 violates its constitutional mandate to protect the fundamental rights of children to the highest degree possible.
The Court of First Instance No. 1 of Palencia (Castilla y León) sided with a father who had doubts as to the vaccination of his 8-year-old son and disagreeing with the mother over the issue.
By judgment of 8 February 2022 (Rol. no. 3650-2022), the Chilean Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Court of Concepción, which found that the individual rights invoked by the father shall be weighed against the mother’s duty to protect her children. It stressed that the decision to vaccinate the girls is in not only in their best interest but also in the interest of the community.
By judgment of 14 January 2022 (no. 200-41-015901-184), the Court of Québec suspended a father’s parental rights on the grounds that, by refusing to vaccinate his son, he was not acting in the child’s best interests.
On 3 February 2022, the 26th Federal Court of Rio de Janeiro rejected a habeas corpus filed by a mother who claimed her daughter's presence at school without being vaccinated (decision HC 5006181-88.2022.4.02.5101/RJ).
On 21 January 2022, the Taiwan Shilinn District Court sentenced a man to five months in prison, commutable to a fine of NT$ 1,000 (US$ 36.11) for each day in prison, for selling counterfeit Chinese masks to the Taiwanese government.
On 3 February 2022, the Italian Council of State reversed the first instance court decision concerning regulatory guidelines on home care COVID-19 therapies (decision n. 00946/2022).
On 1 February 2022, the Supreme Federal Tribunal of Brazil found that, in light of the risks posed by COVID-19, the National Indian Foundation of Brazil (FUNAI) shall implement protective measures over indigenous lands regardless of whether they have been previously demarcated.
On 2 February 2022, the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico (decision no. CC-2022-060) dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiffs challenging the measures by which the Secretary of Health had imposed mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 upon students aged 12 and above. The Court confirmed that such measures are legitimate since they aim to protect a compelling State interest and on the grounds that there are no less onerous measures to achieve that objective.
On 24 January 2022, the Civil and Commercial Court of the Provincial Court of Pichincha (file 122-22-JP) found that the Ministry of Economy and Finance’s non-compliance with previous, clear, and public legal and regulatory provisions in relation to the recognition and payment of labor rights in favor of the plaintiff was illegal.
On 28 January 2022, in case Dolphy vs State of Kerala W.P.(C) No. 1067/2021, the Indian Supreme Court requested the State of Kerala to examine the situation in overcrowded prisons amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Former students at New York University (NYU) brought a class action against the latter alleging breach of its contractual obligations to provide, inter alia, in-person instruction and access to campus facilities in connection with the University’s decision to curtail and cancel its activities for the spring 2020 semester in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
On 20 January 2022, the Nairobi Labor and Labor Relations Tribunal upheld appeal No. E403 presented by the union of employees of hospitals and hotels, employed under the Collective Bargaining Agreement dated April 2020. The court reinstated in the workplace, pursuant to the Employment Act Section 49 3 (2), the employees declared redundant due to an unfair exploitation of the health crisis for COVID-19.
On 28 January 2022, with a judgment filed on 4 February 2022, the Superior Court of New Jersey gave its final approval to a settlement agreement reached in a class action lawsuit filed by a number of students against Rutgers, i.e. the State University of New Jersey.
On 26 January 2022 (decision 61/2022), the Spanish Supreme Court annulled four decrees enacted by the government of the Balearic Islands during the first state of alarm (decrees 10/2020, 12/2020, 13/2020 and 17/2020). These decrees concerned the curfews, limits to the freedom of assembly in private spheres and religious settings, and the arrival of nationals by air and sea.
The pandemic has given rise to a significant number of insurance coverage disputes regarding business interruption and extra expense coverage for losses connected to governmental orders, shut down requirements and, more in general, the spread of COVID-19.
This project and its database have been made possible with the financial support from the World Health Organization