QBD 7 April 1993. In 1988 N decided to carry out extensive repairs to Uppark House. The work included renewing the lead work on the roof. H were specialist subcontractors for the plumbing. The renewal of the roof involved hot work and so vigorous conditions to be observed during the execution of thew work were laid down. On 20 August 1989 two employees of H were using oxy-acetylene torches in the lead work. They left the work unattended while they had a tea-break which was in breach of the subcontract. A fire started which virtually destroyed the house. The question arose as to whether H were liable in tort to N in respect of the losses and liable to indemnify it against N`s liabilites to third parties. It was held that it was not intended that the employer should bear the whole risk of damage by fire, including fire caused by the negligence of the contractors or subcontractors. The contract clause did not provide that loss or damage to the existing structures and the works was to be