Fayad V. Clarendon National Insurance Co‪.‬

We have for review Fayad v. Clarendon National Insurance Co., 857 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), which expressly and directly conflicts with Phoenix Insurance Co. v. Branch, 234 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970).*fn1 The issue before this Court is whether damages caused by blasting are covered under an all-risk insurance policy thatexpressly excludes damage caused by earth movement from coverage. As with any other matter involving exclusionary clauses in insurance policies, our decision is governed by the language of the exclusionary provision andwell-established principles of insurance contract interpretation. We interpretClarendon's earth movement exclusion to belimited to earth movement caused by natural events. We conclude that damage caused by a man-made event such as blasting is covered underClarendon's all-risk insurance policy and does not fall within the earth movement exclusion.