Background: A fire at a bakery caused significant damage, only a portion of which was covered by the fire insurance policy—rightfully so, based on the terms of the contract. (Note: We therefore recommend regularly documenting and reviewing both the insured amounts and the specific terms of the insurance coverage.) The bakery operator claimed the remaining damages by holding the managing director liable for breach of duty. As a result, the managing director assigned his right to indemnification under the D&O insurance to the company (see the attached diagram). D&O insurance typically covers a company’s executives. In the event of a claim, claims must first be asserted against the insured person before they can be enforced against the insurer. This often results in complex and time-consuming liability and coverage disputes. In practice, the dispute is increasingly being litigated in a direct action, through the assignment of the insured person’s right to indemnification to the policyholder. This allows the policyholder to assert its claims directly against the insurer. Regarding the decision: In its ruling of February 26, 2024 (Case No. 16 U 93/23), the Higher Regional Court of Schleswig held that this assignment of the right to indemnification constitutes a “ceasefire agreement” (pactum de non petendo) was implicitly concluded. This agreement prevents liability proceedings against the managing director as long as the claim against the insurer exists and suspends the statute of limitations for statutory liability claims. The suspension under insurance coverage law resulting from the filing of a direct action or a direct claim with the insurer thus also suspends the statutory statute of limitations.