23.01.2025

Construction insurance cover: Sky UK Ltd v Riverstone Managing Agency Ltd

Parties to a building contract usually take out insurance to protect the contract works from damage from unintended events such as vandalism or a flood.  The policy is intended to cover the cost of repairing the damage, so the project can be completed.  Cover is for a fixed period which typically ends when work under the building contract is completed.   

A recent decision by the UK Court of Appeal, Sky UK Ltd v Riverstone Managing Agency Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1567, considered whether a construction all risks policy covered progressive damage which continues after the project (and period of insurance) has come to an end.

The Sky Central building in West London had a timber roof made of engineered and solid wood components.  The roof was not sheltered from the elements during construction, which was held to be a design defect.  Although the completed roof was waterproof, rainwater ingress into roof components had already occurred during its construction.  Once water was inside the components it could not dissipate.  Trapped moisture and water vapour spread through the roof over time, causing swelling of timber, mould and fungal decay.

While swelling and some fungal growth was present prior to practical completion, most of the damage occurred after the policy had expired as components deteriorated and the moisture spread.  This later, progressive damage was agreed to be a natural and foreseeable consequence of the ingress of water during the construction period.

The insurer argued there was no damage during the period of insurance, as there had been no physical change which compromised the structural performance or integrity of the roof components during the construction or maintenance (defects liability) period.  The trial judge and the Court of Appeal disagreed:  damage was suffered during the period of insurance, as a tangible physical change had occurred which impaired the property’s commercial value by making it of less value or utility than would otherwise be the case.   The damage was wetting caused by the ingress of rainwater during the period of insurance in sufficient quantities which – if left unremedied – would lead to a lack of structural integrity and decay.   

The insurer also argued, and the trial judge agreed, that the policy only covered damage which occurred during the period covered by the policy (i.e. up to expiry of the maintenance period).  The progressive damage to the roof caused by the trapped moisture and water vapour was therefore not covered.

The Court of Appeal disagreed.   It said that in a contract of indemnity, the insurer promises to hold the insured party harmless (i.e. promises the insured damage will not occur).  The contract is breached the moment damage occurs.  The insurer – as a contract breaker – must then pay unliquidated damages to put the insured party in the position they would have been in had the breach not occurred.  This is subject to the usual rules relating to causation and quantification of damages.  The insurer is liable for losses arising in the natural or foreseeable course, subject to considerations such as remoteness and mitigation. 

The insurer was accordingly liable for the consequences of the damage that occurred during the period of insurance when water got into the roof components, including the progressive damage caused by that wetting after the period of insurance had expired.

Our Comment

The judgment raises some interesting questions regarding the extent to which cover may be available under a construction policy for damage which occurs a) following completion of the project and/or b) is due to defects in the way the project is built.  This will depend on the policy wording, including the scope of any exclusion for defects in materials, design and construction. 

The Court of Appeal was careful to emphasise that the water ingress in Sky occurred prior to project completion and therefore during the period of insurance.  Liability for water ingress after the expiry of the period of insurance was not in issue.

If you have any questions about this judgment, or construction insurance, please get in touch with our Construction Team or Insurance Team, or your usual contact at Hesketh Henry.

 

Disclaimer:  The information contained in this article is current at the date of publishing and is of a general nature.  It should be used as a guide only and not as a substitute for obtaining legal advice.  Specific legal advice should be sought where required.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

Property
Make Your Premises Good Again
With all the time, effort and cost that goes into taking on a new lease of commercial premises, what happens when it comes time to move on can seem unimportant. It is not surprising, then that make-go...
25.06.2025 Posted in Property
Flooded car
Flooding due to overland flow paths and damaged drainage
Persistent heavy rainfall across the country often results in damage to property due to flooding caused by overland flow paths and defective drainage.  But who is responsible for the cost of the dama...
17.06.2025 Posted in Climate Change & Property
Understanding Indirect Privacy Notification: What you need to know
The Privacy Amendment Bill (the Bill), if passed into law, will require agencies to notify individuals when their personal information is collected from a source other than the individual themselves, ...
16.06.2025 Posted in Corporate & Commercial & Employment
iStock  Succession Plan medium
Family Ties: Intra-Family Succession and Exit Planning
As the second instalment in a series of articles looking at the generational wealth transition and its impacts on business succession in New Zealand, Ben Hickson (partner, Corporate & Commercial...
16.06.2025 Posted in Corporate & Commercial & Private Wealth
Employment law at a glance – June 2025
If you are anything like us, you will be shocked to realise that we are halfway into 2025. As time has been marching on, so too have employment law developments – and there have certainly been quite...
05.06.2025 Posted in Employment
HH Pg  Forrest uncropped
ETS Update: Climate Change Commission recommends minor tweaks to ETS Settings
Last month, He Pou a Rangi Climate Change Commission (the Commission) released its annual advice to the Government on the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) settings for the period 2026 to 2030 (Advice)....
HS Scrabble Med Crop Vignette
Health and safety learnings for landowners following latest Whakaari decision
The leasing and subleasing of land, buildings and infrastructure is commonplace in New Zealand business and commerce, but what happens when something goes wrong? Do landowners have health and safety o...
08.05.2025 Posted in Health & Safety
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.