Haberdashers' Aske's Federation Trust Ltd v Lakehouse Contracts Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 558 (TCC) (19 March 2018)

Haberdashers' Aske's Federation Trust Ltd v Lakehouse Contracts Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 558 (TCC) (19 March 2018)

Where a subcontract expressly requires the subcontractor to obtain its own insurance, the subcontractor is not entitled to the benefit of project-wide insurance as a co-insured, and project insurers may pursue a subrogated claim against the subcontractor to the extent of its own insurance cover.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 558 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Haberdashers' Aske's Federation Trust Limited; Claimant: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lewisham; Defendant: Lakehouse Contracts Limited; Defendant: Cambridge Polymer Roofing Limited; Third Party: Zurich Insurance plc; Third Party: QBE Casualty Syndicate 386; Third Party: CNA Insurance Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Construction Insurance Dispute / Judgment on Preliminary Issues
Outcome
Declaration refused; CPR not entitled to benefit of Project Insurance as co-insured.
Legal Topics
Project Insurance, Co Insureds, Subrogation, Construction Contracts, Third Party Rights, Implied Terms
Insurance Law Construction Law Contract Law Project Insurance Co Insureds Subrogation Construction Contracts Third Party Rights +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Haberdashers' Aske's Federation Trust Limited

Claimant

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lewisham

Claimant

Lakehouse Contracts Limited

Defendant

Cambridge Polymer Roofing Limited

Defendant

Zurich Insurance plc

Third Party

QBE Casualty Syndicate 386

Third Party

CNA Insurance Company Limited

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Construction Insurance Dispute / Judgment on Preliminary Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CPR is entitled to the benefit of project-wide insurance as a co-insured despite an express term requiring its own insurance
  2. 2 Whether project insurers can pursue a subrogated claim against CPR for losses covered by CPR's own insurance
  3. 3 Legal mechanism by which subcontractors become co-insureds under project insurance

Ratio Decidendi

Where a subcontract expressly requires the subcontractor to obtain its own insurance, the subcontractor is not entitled to the benefit of project-wide insurance as a co-insured, and project insurers may pursue a subrogated claim against the subcontractor to the extent of its own insurance cover.

Court Disposition

Declaration refused; CPR not entitled to benefit of Project Insurance as co-insured.

Orders

  • CPR's application for a declaration is dismissed.
  • Project Insurers may pursue a subrogated claim against CPR up to the limit of its own insurance.