Cases - Bartoline Ltd v Royal & Sun Alliance plc. and Heath Lambert Ltd

Record details

Name

Bartoline Ltd v Royal & Sun Alliance plc. and Heath Lambert Ltd

Date

[2006]; [2007]

Citation

EWHC 3598; AII ER (D) 59 (High Court (Merc))

Keywords

Public liability insurance policy - meaning of ‘damages’ - whether damages in a public liability policy provides cover for clean-up costs

Summary

This case considered whether the term ‘damages’ in the coverage clause of a public liability policy provided cover for the costs of cleaning up pollution.

There was a massive fire at Bartoline's factory at which solvent-based products were stored, resulting in the pollution of 2 water courses. The Environment Agency carried out emergency remedial works and subsequently invoiced Bartoline £622,681.78 costs. In addition, the Agency served a works notice on Bartoline, ordering it to carry out further remedial works, for which Bartoline incurred costs of £147,988.14. Bartoline’s claim for the costs against its public liability policy was denied by Royal & SunAlliance. Bartoline then brought an action against the insurer seeking a declaration that such costs were covered.

The court decided that the public liability policy did not provide cover for the cost of remediating the water courses because they were for a statutory debt which was not covered by the policy.

Therefore public liability policies, depending on their wording, may not provide cover for clean-up costs. In order to be assured of cover for clean-up costs, it is necessary to purchase an environmental insurance policy.