The CGL and the Professional Liability Exclusion
Published by International Risk Management Institute (IRMI), expert commentary by Craig Stanovich. Jurisdiction US.
Exactly what this source supports
These are the only claims this record is used to carry anywhere in the library.
The article states that each of the endorsements CG 22 43, CG 22 79 and CG 22 80 is materially different in the scope of the coverage eliminated, and that these endorsements are generally intended to remove coverage from the contractor's CGL policy for engineering, architectural, or surveying services.
claim irmi-cgl-professional-liability-exclusion#c1The article states that the endorsement CG 22 43 is no longer intended by ISO to be used with contractors engaged in construction operations.
claim irmi-cgl-professional-liability-exclusion#c2The article states that CG 22 80 is aimed at design-build contractors.
claim irmi-cgl-professional-liability-exclusion#c3
Each claim above has its own address. Link to a single claim with/sources/irmi-cgl-professional-liability-exclusion#c1, and read the same list with its identifiers, checksums and dates at irmi-cgl-professional-liability-exclusion.json. A checksum lets you tell whether a claim you cited still says what it said.
Pages that cite this source
Reviewer notes
Fetched and read on 2026-08-31; the full article is publicly readable. Author Craig Stanovich, dated April 1, 2014. Used only to describe differences among the filed exclusion endorsements; the operative wording of CG 22 43 04 13 and CG 22 79 04 13 was independently verified by extracting and reading those forms. The article does not state an underwriting, pricing, or coverage-intent rationale for why the professional services exclusion exists, so no such rationale is attributed to it. CG 22 80 itself was not retrieved, so every CG 22 80 statement in this entry rests on this single 2014 secondary source and is labeled as such in the prose. Published: 2014-04-01