Skip to content

Menu

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP logo
HomeAboutContact

The Nickel Report

Trends and Developments in Energy and Environmental Law

Home » Mitigating Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) Risks Through D&O Insurance

Mitigating Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) Risks Through D&O Insurance

By Geoffrey B. Fehling & Yaniel Abreu on April 23, 2021
Posted in ESG

In a recent post (“Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance: What are the Risks, Really?”), we discussed the various risks, trending issues, and emerging concerns arising from environmental, social, and corporate governance (“ESG”). One key takeaway is that ESG-related activity at the federal government is just getting started and that agencies have already begun devoting substantial resources to ESG issues, like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s recently-announced Climate and ESG task force to “develop initiatives to proactively identify ESG-related misconduct.”

In addition to traditional legal liability like lawsuits or enforcement actions, ESG-related risks include risks to corporate reputation, risks associated with project financing, risks associated with lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion, risks based on lobbying, and from lack of corporate ESG coordination. Given those emerging risks, this post looks at insurance—particularly directors and officers liability insurance—as a tool to mitigate at least some potential exposures a company and its executives may face if an ESG-related issue arises.

The SEC’s Climate and ESG task force is one example of increased exposure implicating D&O insurance. The purpose of the task force is to identify ESG-related misconduct by market participants. Initially, the task force will focus on identifying material gaps or misstatements in issuers’ disclosure of climate risks under existing rules, but it will also examine investment advisers’ and funds’ “ESG strategies” and related disclosure and compliance issues. While the task force is in its early days, we foresee companies and executives who come under scrutiny to seek protection under their D&O liability insurance policies for the substantial costs in cooperating with regulators during informal and formal investigations, responding to subpoenas, and defending against and resolving enforcement actions.

ESG issues are also giving rise to increased litigation, from shareholder lawsuits accusing boards of failing to live up to their diversity commitment disclosures to lawsuits focusing on sourcing and supply chain risks implicating human rights and child labor issues. Other ESG-related flash points will continue to emerge as regulators focus on particular areas of concern and companies adjust corporate governance practices and policies in response. Companies should assess what these developments mean for their businesses and how they can protect themselves from potential ESG-related investigations, enforcement actions, and litigation. Unfortunately, even companies that are proactive at addressing their ESG exposure may be unable to avoid regulator or shareholder scrutiny.

Accordingly, as part of their ESG strategies, companies should understand what risks are covered under their D&O insurance policies and, if needed, modify existing coverage or procure new coverage tailored to particular ESG exposures. The list of potential D&O coverage disputes over ESG issues is long, but the good news for policyholders is that D&O policies generally provide some protection against enforcement actions or government investigations. While private companies typically will enjoy broader protection for defense and indemnity in ESG-related lawsuits, public companies should ensure they are adequately protected for securities claims focused on alleged misrepresentations or misstatements in ESG-related disclosures. All policyholders, however, should understand the current limits (and sublimits), exclusions, and other limitations placed on these coverages to understand whether they are appropriately covered for emerging ESG risks.

As the Biden Administration continues to develop its ESG agenda and regulators provide further direction on enforcement priorities, companies should have more guidance to tailor their ESG risk mitigation strategies. In the meantime, companies should be proactive about addressing any potential exposure internally and creating plans for dealing with scrutiny from the task force, including whether they can seek protection under their D&O policies.

Tags: D&O, Environmental and Social Governance, Environmental Social and Corporate Governance, Government Investigations, Shareholder Lawsuits
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Related Posts
European Union Flag
European Union Adopts Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive With Impacts Beyond Europe
December 1, 2022
The,Queue,Of,Steeples,With,Blue,Flags,Of,The,European
Emerging EU ESG Requirements: Transatlantic Implications for Multinational Companies
July 11, 2022
Wall St.
SEC Issues Sample Climate Change Comment Letter
September 30, 2021

Stay Connected

LinkedIn RSS YouTube Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe

Topics

Archives

Blog Authors Show/Hide

  • Yaniel Abreu
  • Chris Alderman
  • Elizabeth E. Aldridge
  • Walter J. Andrews
  • John J. Beardsworth, Jr.
  • Nancy B. Beck, PhD, DABT
  • Timothy E. Biller
  • J. Tom Boer
  • Lawrence J. Bracken II
  • Shannon S. Broome
  • Karma B. Brown
  • Samuel L. Brown
  • F. William Brownell
  • Julia J. Casciotti
  • Jonathan L. Caulder
  • Michelle G. Chan
  • E. Carter Chandler Clements
  • Gia V. Cribbs
  • Christopher J. Cunio
  • Alexandra B. Cunningham
  • Andrea DeField
  • Meredith K. Doswell
  • Colleen P. Doyle
  • Deidre G. Duncan
  • Frederick R. Eames
  • Clare Ellis
  • Latosha M. Ellis
  • Susan S. Failla
  • Geoffrey B. Fehling
  • Andrea Field
  • Hannah Flint
  • Lauren E. Freeman
  • Steven C. Friend
  • Andrew G. Geyer
  • Ian Goldberg
  • Lydia González Gromatzky
  • Erin Grisby
  • Steven M. Haas
  • Luke Hale
  • Alexandra Hamilton
  • Marisa Harrilchak
  • Jason A. Hill
  • Patrick Jamieson
  • Lori Elliott Jarvis
  • Harry M. “Pete” Johnson, III
  • Kevin W. Jones
  • Dan J. Jordanger
  • Jason J. Kim
  • Scott H. Kimpel
  • Charles H. Knauss
  • Garrett Korbitz
  • Garrett Kral
  • J. Pierce Lamberson
  • Lucinda M. Langworthy
  • Matthew Z. Leopold
  • Brian R. Levey
  • Michael S. Levine
  • Elbert Lin
  • Eric R. Link
  • Nash E. Long
  • David S. Lowman, Jr.
  • Diana P. Martin
  • Jeffrey N. Martin
  • Lorelie S. Masters
  • Patrick M. McDermott
  • Kerry L. McGrath
  • Sean P. McLaughlin
  • Robert J. McNamara
  • Michael J. Messonnier, Jr.
  • Jennifer MikoLevine
  • Todd S. Mikolop
  • Michael J. Mueller
  • Eric J. Murdock
  • Ted J. Murphy
  • William L. Newton
  • Henry V. Nickel
  • Paul T. Nyffeler, PhD
  • Sergio F. Oehninger
  • Peter K. O’Brien
  • Evangeline C. Paschal
  • Kate Perkins
  • Shemin V. Proctor
  • John Jay Range
  • Elizabeth Reese
  • Myles F. Reynolds
  • Doris Rodríguez
  • Brent A. Rosser
  • Arthur E. Schmalz
  • Penny A. Shamblin
  • Michael R. Shebelskie
  • George P. Sibley, III
  • Joseph C. Stanko
  • Javaneh S. Tarter
  • Mark J. Thurber
  • Linda C. Trees
  • Andrew J. Turner
  • Emily Burkhardt Vicente
  • Gregory R. Wall
  • Malcolm C. Weiss
  • Susan F. Wiltsie

Recent Update

  • President Biden’s First Veto is on Congress’ Disapproval of ESG Investing Rule
  • EPA Releases Another Compliance Advisory on Pesticide Devices Due to “Substantial Non-Compliance” with FIFRA Requirements
  • DOE Issues FOA for Carbon Capture Large-Scale Pilots and Carbon Capture Demonstration Projects Program
  • First Offshore Wind Energy Lease Sales in the Gulf of Mexico
  • Maine Department of Environmental Protection Releases Proposed Rule Implementing the Procedures for Maine’s Reporting Requirements and Prohibitions for Products Containing PFAS

Links & Resources

  • PipelineLaw.com
  • Energy
  • Environmental
  • Environmental Compliance, Litigation & Defense
  • Regulatory
  • Energy Sector Security Team
  • Air
  • Water
  • Climate Change
  • California’s Proposition 65
  • Chemicals, Products, & Hazardous Materials
  • Pipeline

The Nickel Report

Attorney Advertising

Case results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. Case results do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.
Regulatory Air Water Energy Sector Security Team PipelineLaw.com California's Proposition 65 Climate Change Chemicals, Products, & Hazardous Materials Pipeline test link LinkedIn Environmental Compliance, Litigation & Defense Environmental Energy RSS YouTube Follow Us on Twitter
Privacy NoticeDisclaimerCookies

About Our Practice

Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys have represented clients in nearly every type of matter in virtually every industry sector from natural gas, chemicals, products and hazardous materials, extractive industries, food and beverage, technology, manufacturing, health care, and numerous others on issues related to: climate change law and policy, environmental enforcement defense, water, natural resources and permitting. Our clients benefit from our interdisciplinary approach that combines subject-matter knowledge with skilled advocacy by experienced practitioners at the administrative, legislative, trial and appellate levels.

Copyright © 2023, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo