THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO PARTS.
Florida Insurance Law is an example of Comprehensive General Liability Insurance Issues arising from Construction Defect Claims. Specifically, it is an example of how things have changed in that arena.
This example begins at the beginning: with cases involving pre-1986 standard-form Commercial General Liability Insurance Policies. Looking at the language in those forms and endorsements, and also looking beyond the contract language to the avowed purpose of CGL Coverage, the Florida courts rejected CGL Coverage for many construction defect claims arising from a contractor's faulty workmanship. Most if not all of these holdings involved damages claims against an insured general contractor for the replacement of its own defective materials and work. See, e.g., Download LaMarche v. Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. (Fla. 1980).
Once a construction project was completed, of course, even if the particular CGL Policy contained Coverage for a "Products - Completed Operations Hazard" still such Coverage was specifically excluded under these early forms for property damage to work performed by the named insured arising out of such work or any portion thereof. Thus, where the named insured was also the defendant general contractor, all work on the construction project was deemed to be the work of the general contractor. Under these forms, then, there was no Coverage under the general contractor's CGL. Download Tucker Construction Co. v. Michigan Mut. Ins. Co. (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO PARTS. Please Read The Disclaimer.
Comments