There is no difference in the wording of the insured contract definition or the contractual liability exclusion found in the 12 04 and 12 07 editions of the CGL form.

The definition of insured contract in CG 24 26 is different. It is a tool for underwriters who want to exclude coverage for tort liability assumed under a contract when the indemnitor or anyone acting on his behalf does not cause, in whole or in part, the injury or damage. The intent is to reduce the degree of coverage having to do with contractual liability. Without this endorsement, the contractual liability coverage could provide coverage for the sole fault of an indemnitee, if sole fault were required in a contract or agreement and not held to be void and unenforceable under an anti-indemnification statute. So, when CG 24 26 is issued, coverage for sole fault is reduced to partial fault of the indemnitee. In other words, the BI or PD must be caused in whole or in part by the named insured or by those acting on behalf of the named insured.

Several states have enacted anti-indemnification laws having to do with construction contracts dealing with sole fault assumptions. In response to this, CG 24 26 states that the partial fault coverage is considered an insured contract only if such assumption is prescribed by contract or agreement or is otherwise permitted by law.