工程缺陷CGL承保范围:分包商例外

Christian H. Robertson
{"title":"工程缺陷CGL承保范围:分包商例外","authors":"Christian H. Robertson","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.7.1.defective","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the construction industry, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance is the standard policy for managing property damage risks. Historically, CGL policies do not cover an insured’s own defective construction because the insured controls its own work and can reasonably foresee the damage that may result from defective work. But what about the defective work of an insured’s subcontractor? Practical considerations limit an insured's effective control of every aspect of a subcontractor’s work, and this limitation complicates the insured’s ability to foresee future risks. In 1986, the increasing involvement of subcontractors led general contractors to insist upon protection from subcontractor work risks in CGL policies. The insurance industry agreed upon and created the subcontractor exception. Insurers, however, have claimed that CGL policies exclude coverage for any defective work, including the work of a subcontractor.\n\nThis Note discusses court decisions rejecting the categorical denial of coverage for any defective work and how courts have found coverage exists where a subcontractor’s defective work is beyond the insured’s effective control and not foreseeable. Over the past 15 years, 23 state supreme courts have ruled that CGL policies cover the defective workmanship of an insured’s subcontractor. To illustrate the trend toward coverage, the Note summarizes a recent Ohio appellate court decision as a case study of the issue.","PeriodicalId":333345,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defective Construction CGL Coverage: The Subcontractor Exception\",\"authors\":\"Christian H. Robertson\",\"doi\":\"10.36639/mbelr.7.1.defective\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the construction industry, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance is the standard policy for managing property damage risks. Historically, CGL policies do not cover an insured’s own defective construction because the insured controls its own work and can reasonably foresee the damage that may result from defective work. But what about the defective work of an insured’s subcontractor? Practical considerations limit an insured's effective control of every aspect of a subcontractor’s work, and this limitation complicates the insured’s ability to foresee future risks. In 1986, the increasing involvement of subcontractors led general contractors to insist upon protection from subcontractor work risks in CGL policies. The insurance industry agreed upon and created the subcontractor exception. Insurers, however, have claimed that CGL policies exclude coverage for any defective work, including the work of a subcontractor.\\n\\nThis Note discusses court decisions rejecting the categorical denial of coverage for any defective work and how courts have found coverage exists where a subcontractor’s defective work is beyond the insured’s effective control and not foreseeable. Over the past 15 years, 23 state supreme courts have ruled that CGL policies cover the defective workmanship of an insured’s subcontractor. To illustrate the trend toward coverage, the Note summarizes a recent Ohio appellate court decision as a case study of the issue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":333345,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.7.1.defective\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.7.1.defective","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在建筑行业,商业一般责任保险(CGL)是管理财产损失风险的标准政策。从历史上看,CGL政策不包括被保险人自己有缺陷的建筑,因为被保险人控制自己的工作,可以合理地预见可能由有缺陷的工作造成的损害。但是如果被保险人的分包商的工作有缺陷怎么办?实际考虑限制了被保险人对分包商工作的各个方面的有效控制,这种限制使被保险人预测未来风险的能力复杂化。1986年,越来越多的分包商的参与导致总承包商坚持在CGL政策中保护分包商的工作风险。保险行业同意并创造了分包商例外。然而,保险公司声称,CGL保单不包括任何有缺陷的工作,包括分包商的工作。本说明讨论法院判决拒绝对任何缺陷工程的绝对拒绝承保,以及法院如何发现在分包商的缺陷工程超出被保险人的有效控制和不可预见的情况下存在承保。在过去的15年里,有23个州的最高法院裁定,CGL政策涵盖了被保险人分包商的有缺陷的工艺。为了说明覆盖的趋势,《说明》总结了俄亥俄州上诉法院最近的一项裁决,作为对该问题的案例研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Defective Construction CGL Coverage: The Subcontractor Exception
In the construction industry, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance is the standard policy for managing property damage risks. Historically, CGL policies do not cover an insured’s own defective construction because the insured controls its own work and can reasonably foresee the damage that may result from defective work. But what about the defective work of an insured’s subcontractor? Practical considerations limit an insured's effective control of every aspect of a subcontractor’s work, and this limitation complicates the insured’s ability to foresee future risks. In 1986, the increasing involvement of subcontractors led general contractors to insist upon protection from subcontractor work risks in CGL policies. The insurance industry agreed upon and created the subcontractor exception. Insurers, however, have claimed that CGL policies exclude coverage for any defective work, including the work of a subcontractor. This Note discusses court decisions rejecting the categorical denial of coverage for any defective work and how courts have found coverage exists where a subcontractor’s defective work is beyond the insured’s effective control and not foreseeable. Over the past 15 years, 23 state supreme courts have ruled that CGL policies cover the defective workmanship of an insured’s subcontractor. To illustrate the trend toward coverage, the Note summarizes a recent Ohio appellate court decision as a case study of the issue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信