Limits of Insurance vs. Policy Language

[messibarca]

For a Premises Environmental Coverage Policy, in the Declarations, the Limit of Insurance listed for Remediation of On-site Contamination says "No Coverage Per Contamination Incident." Yet, the body of the policy says that Remediation expenses resulting from on-site contamination is covered. So what does this mean? Does this mean that b/c the declarations says that no coverage is provided, then that is the case? Or does this mean that b/c the body of the policy says that coverage is provided, that the $$ coverage amount for on-site contamination remediation expenses comes out of the policy's total aggregate limit?

I am trying to figure out which clause dominates-- the "no coverage for contamination incident" in the declarations or the policy itself.

 

[Zigner]

For a Premises Environmental Coverage Policy, in the Declarations, the Limit of Insurance listed for Remediation of On-site Contamination says "No Coverage Per Contamination Incident." Yet, the body of the policy says that Remediation expenses resulting from on-site contamination is covered. So what does this mean? Does this mean that b/c the declarations says that no coverage is provided, then that is the case? Or does this mean that b/c the body of the policy says that coverage is provided, that the $$ coverage amount for on-site contamination remediation expenses comes out of the policy's total aggregate limit?

I am trying to figure out which clause dominates-- the "no coverage for contamination incident" in the declarations or the policy itself.

Sorry, this forum is for US law only.

With that said, it seems to me that the expenses will be covered up to the limit of your policy for that item. Since the limit of the policy is -0-, it's effectively not covered.