Australia: What constitutes "wear and tear" under an ISR Policy?

Curwoods Case Note
Last Updated: 7 September 2011
Article by Paul Garnon

Judgment date: 25 July 2011

JSM Management Pty Ltd v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2011] VSC 339

Supreme Court of Victoria1

In Brief

  • The operation of a container forklift on a concrete hardstand, which was not of sufficient capacity to bear the weight of the forklift, caused substantial cracking and damage to the hardstand.
  • The court considered significant questions as to the proper interpretation of 2 provisions of an ISR policy.
  • The first was whether an exclusion clause with respect to liability for wear and tear to the insured premises would apply.
  • The second was whether a condition which required an insured to take reasonable precautions in respect of damage to the insured premises would apply in circumstances where the insured knew the container forklift was being used.


JSM Management Pty Ltd (JSM) held an industrial special risks insurance policy (Policy) with QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd (QBE). The Policy was for a 12-month period and provided cover for loss or damage to insured premises. The insured premises consisted of a transport warehouse. The warehouse was leased to Gaffney's Logistics Pty Ltd (Gaffney's), who used the warehouse as a transport/depot yard.

A hardstand area adjacent to the warehouse formed part of the leased premises and was used by Gaffney's to carry a container forklift. The hardstand was not of capacity to bear the weight of the container forklift. Gaffney's continued to use the container forklift on the hardstand, despite requests by JSM and its agents to stop. Consequently, the hardstand sustained damage and JSM sought indemnity pursuant to the Policy. QBE denied indemnity on the basis of the exclusion clause for damage sustained to insured premises as a result of wear and tear and alternatively for breach of the reasonable precautions provision.

Clause 4(b) of the Policy excluded liability for:

"... physical loss, destruction or damage occasion by or happening through:

(b) wear and tear, fading, scratching or marring, gradual deterioration or developing flaws, normal upkeep or making good"

Condition 11 of the Policy relevantly provided:

"The insured shall take all reasonable precautions to prevent loss, destruction or damage to the property insured by this policy."

JSM brought the matter before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal).

Tribunal Hearing

The Tribunal found that the hardstand was damaged through the weight of the container forklift which continued to be operated upon the hardstand over a period of approximately 8 months while Gaffney's was in occupation of the property. It was accepted that the hardstand was built to withstand 10 tonne axle loads, however the container forklift could potentially weigh in the order of 100 tonnes under load.

JSM's contention that there were ongoing repeated requests to Gaffney's not to use the container forklift on site was not accepted, but there was an initial warning by JSM's agent with a follow-up by Mr Marro (JSM's representative) and then further follow-up by JSM's business associate (but, only after damage was present and obvious). JSM was clearly attempting to negotiate with Gaffney's to reinforce the hardstand as part of a business opportunity.

The Tribunal construed the 2 terms "wear" and "tear" separately. "Wear" was distinguished from "tear" on the basis that "wear" related to use of a thing, whereas "tear" related to the impact of natural forces on something2. The Tribunal found that this matter only involved "wear". The Tribunal found that the operation of the forklift on the hardstand or the use of the hardstand by the forklift caused "wear" and thus the damage to the hardstand was excluded.

QBE also raised JSM's obligation to take all reasonable precautions to prevent loss. JSM submitted that they had repeatedly requested Gaffney's to not use the container forklift on the hardstand. The Tribunal found that:

  1. there were only 3 attempts made by agents of JSM requesting that Gaffney's not continue to use the container forklift on the hardstand;
  2. JSM had knowledge that the unauthorised use of the container forklift on the hardstand was occurring; and
  3. JSM had the right to bring the lease to an end, however, evidence was adduced that JSM refrained from acting on their rights of re-entry and termination under the lease, preferring instead to negotiate with Gaffney's and preserve/improve their commercial interests/position. JSM was clearly attempting to negotiate with Gaffney's to reinforce the hardstand as part of a business opportunity.

Despite these factual findings, without reason, the Tribunal concluded that:

"... in the circumstances the Insurer cannot rely upon the reasonable precautions ground to avoid indemnity ..."3

Appeal to Supreme Court

JSM sought review of the decision of the Tribunal on the following grounds:

  1. The Tribunal erred in law in its interpretation of the phrase "wear and tear" in the Policy as including damage being caused by other than ordinary and normal use; and 
  2. The Tribunal erred in finding that the damage was caused by the weight, rather than by the operation, of the forklift.

QBE alternatively contended that JSM had failed to take all the reasonable precautions in breach of condition 11.

The appeal proceeded only upon the first basis and QBE's contention regarding the reasonable precautions condition. Osborne J found that the second ground was not a correct reflection of the decision of the Tribunal, which concluded that the hardstand sustained damage due to a combination of excessive weight and continued operation over a period of 8 months.Wear and Tear JSM submitted (both throughout the Tribunal proceedings and the Appeal) that any "wear" in terms of "wear and tear" should be "... equated with ordinary wear ..."4 and the use of the hardstand in these proceedings was "... not 'ordinary wear' ..." 5

Justice Osborne agreed with this interpretation, citing dictionary references from both the Macquarie and Oxford Dictionaries that the primary meaning of "wear" is "... damage due to or sustained during ordinary usage ..."6 Osborne J qualified the definition of "wear" when considering the "tear" element, noting that "... the concept unifying both words is damage caused by ordinary, as against extraordinary, events ..."7

Justice Osborne referred to London and Provincial Leather Processes Ltd v Hudson8, where it was held that "... wear and tear is regarded as a consequence of ordinary usage and ordinary weather.." He also referred to a notable judicial authority9 concerning the interpretation of a "wear and tear" exclusion clause in an insurance policy:

"... 'wear and tear' mean simply and solely that ordinary and natural deterioration or abrasion which an object experiences by its expected contacts between its component parts and outside objects during the period of its natural life expectancy. We do not find that the modifiers 'ordinary' or 'natural' add anything to the commonly understood meaning of 'wear and tear' ..."10

Counsel for QBE submitted that the use of the container forklift on the hardstand constituted ordinary use since this use continued throughout Gaffney's occupation of the leased premises and was not objected to, nor prevented by JSM (despite JSM's rights to do so pursuant to the lease).

Osborne J reinforced that the wear and tear terms of the Policy are to be given their usual, business-like meaning, saying that:

"... when the policy is read as a whole there is no contextual reason for giving the phrase wear and tear other than its usual meaning ..."11

He described that the use of the overweight container forklift on the hardstand could not"... objectively be described as 'ordinary use' ..."12 and rejected the submission by counsel for QBE that the "... objective onlooker would be amazed ..."13 if the damage did not constitute wear and tear and therefore come within the exclusion.

Accordingly, he found that the first ground of the appeal must succeed.

Reasonable Precautions

Justice Osborne acknowledged that this obligation had been narrowly construed in many cases. Osborne J followed long-standing authority14 (and discussed more recent cases in relation to this test) citing that where an insured identifies a danger, they:

"... should not deliberately court it by taking measures which he himself knows are inadequate to avert it. In other words, it is not enough that the employer's omission to take any particular precautions to avoid accidents should be negligent; it must be at least reckless, that is to say, made with actual recognition by the insured himself that a danger exists, and not caring whether or not it is averted ..."15

Counsel for QBE submitted that this obligation should be construed differently in policies for property insurance, and that the NSW Court of Appeal decision of Legal and General Insurance Australia Limited v Eather16 (Eather) should not be followed. In Eather, it was decided that the interpretation of this obligation should not be contingent upon the different coverage provided in various policies. Osborne J did not depart from this standard, citing that:

"... An industrial special risks policy provides indemnity for any loss, damage or destruction of the insured property unless caused by an event specifically excluded. The question of what are 'reasonable precautions' must be construed in light of this commercial purpose ..." 17

Justice Osborne found the Tribunal's conclusion that " the circumstances the Insurer cannot rely upon the reasonable precautions ground to avoid indemnity' ..."18 to be inherently unsatisfactory. The findings of the Tribunal raised a seriously arguable issue as to whether the condition was or was not satisfied. Firstly, it followed from the Tribunal's findings that this case concerned damage which was in fact foreseen as distinct from foreseeable by JSM. Secondly, the Tribunal found that JSM knew that the forklift was in fact being used on a continued basis throughout the lease. Thirdly, by February 2008, JSM knew that serious damage was in fact eventuating, and that Gaffney's was continuing to use the forklift. Lastly, JSM elected not to stop the damage as it could have done by terminating the lease, but to negotiate with a view to reconstructing the hardstand by agreement on commercial terms. It did this knowing that the damage was continuing.

On the face of the Tribunal's findings there was, at least from February 2008, a deliberate course of inaction which JSM realised would result in continuing damage to the property. In effect, JSM elected to keep receiving the rent, knowing that damage was occurring, but hoping to reach a new commercial agreement as to the construction of further improvements to the premises.

The Tribunal did not analyse the facts as it found them by reference to the requirements of

the reasonable precautions condition. It did not identify the factual basis on which it found that the test was met.

Despite urging from both parties the court was not prepared to draw its own conclusions

and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal.

The court noted an additional complication which was that the reasonable precautions condition may result in only a partial defence to the claim if the Tribunal concluded that JSM's conduct was not reckless in the relevant sense until February 2008 or some other point during Gaffney's 8-month occupation. If it were proven by JSM that at least some part of the loss was incurred prior to any reckless omission by it, s 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) may operate to prevent the insurer from refusing to pay that part of the claim. Furthermore, if only part of the claim succeeded, not only will the extent of the insured's liability involve questions of fact and degree, but difficult issues of quantum may also arise.


The wear and tear exclusion is likely to be interpreted as only excluding wear and tear from damage sustained during ordinary usage or during the course of the 'fair' or 'reasonable' use of the premises for any of the purposes for which they were let.

Abnormal or extraordinary wear is unlikely to be excluded.

Knowledge of the extraordinary use or abnormal wear and tear by the policy holder together with a failure to stop the extraordinary use could constitute a failure to take reasonable precautions to prevent damage to the insured premises but this will depend upon close consideration of all the facts in the case.

The interpretation of the reasonable precautions condition in an ISR policy is the same as the approach or interpretation given under a liability policy which requires an insurer to establish that an insured has deliberately courted a risk by taking measures which he himself knows are inadequate to avert it.

1 Justice Osborne

2 Taylor v Webb (1937) 2 KB 283 at 302-304 per Scott LJ

3 Justice Osborne at 70

4 Para 18

5 Ibid (para 18).

6 Para 24

7 Para 25

8 [1939] KB 724 per Goddard LJ

9 Cyclops Corporation v Home Insurance Company 352 F Supp 931 (1973)

10 Para 33

11 Para 42

12 Para 45

13 Para 46-47

14 Fraser v BN Furman (Productions) Limited [1967] 1 WLR 898 ('Fraser') per Diplock LJ

15 Para 52

16 6 NSWLR 390

17 Para 63

18 Para 7 

Ranked No 1 - Australia's fastest growing law firm' (Legal Partnership Survey, The Australian July 2010)

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.