Helping you make informed business decisions with confidence.

Two Australian case authorities on the operation of an exclusion for ‘flood’ are the Queensland Supreme Court decisions in LMT Surgical Pty Ltd v Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd and Wiesac Pty Ltd v Insurance Australia Group Ltd. The first of those cases concerned the words ‘water overflowing from the normal confines’ and the second ‘water escaping or released from the normal confines’. The plaintiff was successful in the first-mentioned case but unsuccessful in the second, with the judge noting that there was only one word that was different in the flood exclusion in Wiesac compared to that considered in LMT Surgical. In a later Queensland Supreme Court case, of Landel Pty Ltd v Insurance Australia Ltd, Dalton J was called upon to consider an exclusion for ‘flood’ which was in all respects identical to the exclusion under consideration in LMT Surgical. Carter Newell acted for the insurer in the latter two cases, and all three authorities are considered by Partner Patrick Mead in this issue of Constructive Notes.