000			01014cam a2200229 4500
001			ABS64084
008			000000n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u113358
100			_aBessey, J.
245			_aTriumph at court
260			_c2001
490			_aBuilding _v266(8190) 22 June 2001, 52-53(2)
520			_aConsiders how, in the light of the judgment in "Matalan v Tokenspire", a subsidiary company can be compensated for a loss it had incurred but which had been paid for by the parent, even where the parent was not a party to the contract. Observes that it is the party which has suffered the initial damage, rather than the party that has paid to put it right, that is entitled to compensation. Also looks at joint insurance in relation to recovery of loss.
590			_aABS
650			_aCOMPENSATION
650			_aDAMAGE
650			_aInsurance _96249
650			_aJOINT INSURANCE
650			_aMATALAN V TOKENSPIRE
690			_aBUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
999			_c67533 _d67533