Lord Griffiths said that, in so far as it had to be assumed that the same terms were terms of both the life insurance policy and the reinsurance policy, his Lordship agreed with the reasons given by Lord Templeman and Lord Lowry. However, at the trial it had been sought to challenge that assumption and to argue that the 24-hour-watch clause was not a term of the reinsurance policy. To do so would have required amendment of the pleadings and the judge had refused leave to amend.