Image from Google Jackets

Exceptions rule

By: Series: Building ; 269(8320) 20 February 2004, 49(1)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Summary: Advises on the fine examination of insurance policies in the light of "Pilkington UK Ltd v CGU Insurance plc" ([2004] EWCA Civ 23, Abs...). Pilkington's appeal was dismissed when they claimed that defects in glass panels had caused physical damage to the structure of the Eurostar terminal at Waterloo. CGU argued that the deteriorisation of the cladding was not physical damage in itself.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS67480 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 125336-1001

Advises on the fine examination of insurance policies in the light of "Pilkington UK Ltd v CGU Insurance plc" ([2004] EWCA Civ 23, Abs...). Pilkington's appeal was dismissed when they claimed that defects in glass panels had caused physical damage to the structure of the Eurostar terminal at Waterloo. CGU argued that the deteriorisation of the cladding was not physical damage in itself.