Argues that the finding of a pervasive insurable interest is inconsistent with the doctrine of insurable interest. This doctrine is generally understood to operate in English insurance law and suggests the time has come for the courts to repudiate the concept. Cites the decision in "Cooperative Retail Services Ltd v Taylor Young Partnership Ltd and others" ([2002] UKHL 17, Abs65789), where the employer under a construction contract insured liability for damage to the project in the joint names of all contractors and subcontractors and no contribution could be claimed from any of them, directly or by subrogation, for insured losses. Suggests in future co-insured should not have a pervasive insurable interest in the whole of the insured property and advocates relying on the reasoning in the "Cooperative" case, whereby, in the contract between the co-insured, a term implies the parties will not sue one another in the event that one causes damage to their common project.