Corporal Punishment Exclusion

While reviewing an insurance policy recently, I came across an endorsement form with an exclusion for corporal punishment. This is an ISO form (CG 22 30) and is decades old. This endorsement is meant for commercial general liability policies (the “cg” in the form number standard for “commercial general”) and provides:


This insurance does not apply to “bodily injury”, “property damage” or “personal and advertising injury” to your student arising out of any corporal punishment administered by or at the direction of any insured.


Consider this. Does this form add anything to the standard CGL policy? The “bodily injury” and “property damage” coverage is “occurrence”-based. (I’ll try to edit this later to add citations to the Insurance Law Lessons that explain these terms). Is injury that arises out of corporal punishment an accident? If it is, would the “expected or intended injury” exclusion apply?


The answer almost certainly varies by jurisdiction. The argument would be that the person inflicting the corporal punishment did not expect or intend any cognizable injury to result. Still, ultimately corporal punishment comes down to one person physically striking another. Sounds like it would not be an “occurrence.”


Bonus question: Does this endorsement exclusion add anything over the standard “assault and battery” exclusionary endorsements?

Leave a Reply