Insurance cover public liability

There is a legal requirement upon most employers to have in force employer s liability insurance covering injury to their employees. Public liability insurance, while not compulsory, is strongly recommended, both in terms of third-party liability (arising from the effects of corporate activities) and product liability (arising from the effects of corporate products. 

Nothing contained in any API publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for the manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters patent. Neither should anything contained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent. 

As discussed above, damage caused to a third party s interests from contamination migrating from a contaminated site is unlikely to be covered by a current public liability policy. Any migration would almost certainly be judged by an insurer to... 

Costs to clean up the insured s own sites are not normally available from the traditional insurance market. It is not a claim that would be considered under a current public liability policy and if the contamination was known about, and also very severe then the site is unlikely to obtain site-specific environmental insurance to cover the required clean-up costs. The only situation where there may be a glimmer of hope from an insurance perspective is in situations where those facing liability for clean-up were tenants on the land and not the landowners themselves. It was, and still is, relatively common practice for tenants to have their public liability policies extended to provide indemnity to them for any damage they caused to the freeholder s land or property. If such a policy extension were to be available on an old occurrence worded policy held by a tenant the property damage part of the cover may provide them with some opportunity to gain an amount of insurance indemnity for any requirement placed upon them to clean up their landlord s land. 

Where consultants are involved in providing contracting services as well as consulting services, they must ensure that they have an adequate degree of insurance to cover both aspects of their work. Although not common, it is possible to obtain tailor-made policies that encompass the indemnification provisions of both a professional indemnity policy and a public liability policy providing the necessary degree of cover for pollution related claims. 

Public liability policies are already having their scope reduced so there is no intended cover for gradual pollution damage and very real possibilities that their scope will be further reduced in the near future to remove cover for all forms of pollution related damage. UK industry should be aware of this restriction and companies should consider whether or not their existing portfolio of insurance provides adequate protection. 

All chemical companies that may provide assistance or advice in case of distribution incidents should confirm with their insurance companies that their policies do cover potential claims arising from such service for their own products. Those eompanies that may be involved in giving assistance or advice with respect to products other than their own should notify their insurance companies specifically of this fact and obtain confirmation that their general public liability policy will provide coverage for these activities. This should not lead to increases in insurance premiums. 

In contrast to the Public Liability Insurance policy it is not usual to impose a Limit of Indemnity to the Employer s Liability policy. It also usually includes cover for all costs and expenses incurred with the insurance companies consent and extends to include the cost of representation of the Insured at proceedings in a Court of Summary Jurisdiction arising out of an alleged breach of statutory duty resulting in bodily injury or disease which may be the subject of indemnity under the policy. 

Public liability insurance is different. It covers for claims made against a person/company by members of the public or other businesses, but not for claims made by employees. While public liability insurance is generally voluntary, employers liability insurance is compulsory. Employers can be fined if they do not hold a current employers liability insurance policy which complies with the law. 

Due to the nature of the common law relating to negligence in the UK it is obvious that an employer is liable to be sued for compensation for any loss or damages suffered by his employees. It is for this reason that employers in the UK are obliged by law to hold compulsory employers liability insurance . This insurance covers the employers for claims from their employees for up to 5 million. Employers will also take out public liability insurance to cover themselves from claims made by third parties who are seeking compensation for a loss, although this is not compulsory. 

The manufacturers of a mass product that is far from the end-user, such as cement or concrete, are under extreme price competition and slightest changes in, say, the cost stracture can be decisive. Elimination of water-soluble chrome-VI compounds that cause chromate-induced eczema would only increase the price of the product minimally. And even if the severe price competition did in fact permit this increased margin (which is highly probable in this example), there has been no significant iimovation push. Uirfortunately, this occupational disease is hardly perceived by the public and the costs incurred by this type of eczema evidently can be externalised by the cement industry (and covered by the employer s liability insurance). 

---