Counsel for Zurich objected to Kroeger’s characterizations and claims, telling jurors that Mondelez was misleading and only telling half of the story. For example, the email Kroeger referenced did not relate to the policy exclusion at issue but rather a different policy provision relating to geographic locations.
Silverberg asserted that Zurich’s policy exclusion does not only apply to warlike acts involving tanks and guns but hostile acts as well. He stressed that warlike actions can be taken during war and peace.
Silverberg pointed out the widespread damage NotPetya caused to the Ukrainian economy, including companies like Mondelez, “we don’t think anybody could reasonably disagree” that it was a hostile act.
Silverberg told the jury, that since the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula by Russia, Ukraine and Russia have been engaged in an ongoing conflict, and that the NotPetya cyberattack was part of Russia’s military strategy in waging cyberwarfare against its enemies.
Silverberg said that the evidence presented at trial will prove that only Russia had the means and motive to unleash such a devastating cyberattack. He also claimed that the evidence will show that “one way to cripple a nation’s economy is to introduce a virus through its taxpayer software,” he said.
