Where a composite insurance policy covers both a landlord's and tenant's interests, and the insurer pays out the tenant's claim in respect of the tenant's distinct liability to reinstate under a lease, the insurer has no right of contribution from the landlord's separate insurer, because the payment relates to a different insurable interest and a different risk. The landlord's double insurance becomes irrelevant where the landlord ultimately suffers no loss due to the tenant's reinstatement.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.