Saturday, January 24, 2009

Insurance Requirement in Bid Documents Does Not Trigger Blanket Additional Insured Coverage

Illinois Natl. Ins. Co. v. American Alternative Ins. Corp.

(1st Dept., decided 1/22/2009)

Defendant's policy with a nonparty subcontractor included as an additional insured "any person or organization for whom you are performing operations when you and such person or organization have agreed in writing in a contract or agreement that such person or organization be added as an additional insured on your policy."

The contract between the subcontractor and the general contractor (GC) and City of New York did not contain a requirement that the GC and City be named as additional insureds.  The bid documents, however, stated that the work "shall be governed by" certain terms and conditions, including a requirement that the GC and City plaintiffs be added as additional insureds on the subcontractor's policy. 

Plaintiff, which insured the CG andCity, argued that the language of the bid documents constituted a "contract or agreement" and triggered the automatic or blanket additional insured coverage under the defendant insurer's policy.  The First Department disagreed, AFFIRMING the motion court's order denying plaintiffs' motion and granting defendant's cross motion declaring that defendant was not obligated to defend or indemnify the GC and City in an underlying personal injury action.

Additionally, the First Department reminded that "[t]he certificate of insurance generated by the subcontractor's broker, by its terms, confers no rights upon the certificate holder".  

No comments: