Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 SEPTEMBER 2009

Buckled Tracks Near Miss For Insurer

Trident General Insurance Co Ltd v McNiece Bros Pty Ltd [1988], recognised an exception to the doctrine of privity of contract where a contract is classified as a "liability insurance contract" and that a third party may sue on that contract where it is expressed to be insured by it.

AustraliaInsurance

Trident General Insurance Co Ltd v McNiece Bros Pty Ltd [1988], recognised an exception to the doctrine of privity of contract where a contract is classified as a "liability insurance contract" and that a third party may sue on that contract where it is expressed to be insured by it.

A third party subcontractor recently attempted to broaden the scope of Trident to obtain indemnity from its head contractors under a works contract. The court refused to broaden the scope and held that a third party could not succeed where the contract relied upon is not a "liability insurance contract".

On 6 October 2000, a Cityrail train owned by the State Rail Authority of NSW (SRA) left the rails as it approached Kingsgrove Station on the East Hills line. A number of people were injured and both the train and the track and its infrastructure suffered severe damage.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from