subject: Insurance Issues - Contamination - Part I [print this page] Although it stands by itself, the contamination exclusion ties in quite closely with the processing exclusion. The text of the contamination exclusion varies considerably from one ARPI policy to another.
Some exclusions define contamination by reference to pollution or change in texture, finish, colour or flavour.
Some exclusions simply include contamination amongst a whole variety of perils in one clause such as "... corrosion, rust, change in temperature, dampness, dryness, wet or dry rot, shrinkage, evaporation, loss of weight, contamination, change in colour, flavour, texture or finish...".
Most policies make no attempt to define contamination. There is no generally accepted definition of contamination and, in fact, the difficulty of defining contamination has resulted in AIRMIC setting up a special working party to study the problem. In the area of environmental liability, the Department of the Environment in 1991 issued a consultation paper and a proposal for public registers of land which may be contaminated. The paper stated that the government considered that contamination was a necessary but not a sufficient condition for pollution. Therefore, the commission used "contamination" to denote the presence in the environment of certain substances as against it denoting a substance which is harmful. However, the manner in which "contamination" is referred to in environment-related legislation is not really applicable to the ARPI policies.
Most policies do include a proviso of one sort or another either allowing pollution or contamination which results from a non-excluded peril or damage caused by a non-excluded peril which results from pollution or contamination or both.
Insurance Issues - Contamination - Part I
By: Willis J. Watson
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
