Image from Google Jackets

Summers and another v Congreve Horner & Co (Independent Insurance Co Ltd, third party)

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1992) 40 EG 144-151(4)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: CA 8 July 1992. In February 1989 the plaintiffs were buying a house and engaged the defendant surveyors, C, to survey the house and produce a report. After purchase of the house S discovered damp and dry rot which was not mentioned in the report. C turned to their liability insurers who said that the claim was not covered because of a clause on the policy excluding liability for work done by unqualified employees in certain circumstances. The Official Referee ordered a subtrial of the dispute and held that the claim was not covered by the policy. C appealed. It was held that `supervision` as required under the policy did not mean that the qualified person need attend the site even for a short period. The supervision given to the trainee considering his experience and stage of training had been adequate. One judge of the three did however dissent.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS47332 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 61641-1001

CA 8 July 1992. In February 1989 the plaintiffs were buying a house and engaged the defendant surveyors, C, to survey the house and produce a report. After purchase of the house S discovered damp and dry rot which was not mentioned in the report. C turned to their liability insurers who said that the claim was not covered because of a clause on the policy excluding liability for work done by unqualified employees in certain circumstances. The Official Referee ordered a subtrial of the dispute and held that the claim was not covered by the policy. C appealed. It was held that `supervision` as required under the policy did not mean that the qualified person need attend the site even for a short period. The supervision given to the trainee considering his experience and stage of training had been adequate. One judge of the three did however dissent.