The court considered the meaning of ‘war’ in the context of an insurance contract: ‘The issue is not whether the events in Lebanon were recognised in the United Kingdom as amounting to a civil war in the sense in which the term is used in Public International Law with the corollary that this country would, if the occasion had arisen, have accorded to the participants the rights and demanded of them the duties appropriate to belligerents. The question here is whether there was a civil war within the meaning of the policy.’ and ‘Methods of pursuing political aims and of waging an armed struggle do not stand still. A situation existing today might fall outside a definition formulated in the past, not because the Judge or scholar who proposed it considered that the situation should be excluded but simply because the possibility that it might exist had not crossed his mind . . The same comment applies to a collection of materials relating to Public International Law . . The words under construction are to be given their ordinary business meaning, which is not necessarily the same as the one which they bear in Public International Law. The statements of jurists are a useful source of insights, but they do not provide a direct solution…’ Three questions were generally involved: (1) Can it be said that the conflict was between opposing ‘sides’? (2) What were the objectives of the ‘sides’ and how did they set about achieving them? (3) What was the scale of the conflict, and of its effect on public order and on the life of the inhabitants?
Judges:
Mustill J
Citations:
[1980] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 406
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Kawasaki Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha of Kobe v Bantham Steamship Company Limited CA 1939
The case was heard against the background of an armed conflict between Japan and China. The charterparty contract included a clause providing for cancellation ‘if war breaks out involving Japan’.
Held: The court rejected an argument that the . .
Cited by:
Cited – If P and C Insurance Limited (Publ.) v Silversea Cruises Limited, Silver Cloud Shipping Company Sa, Silver Wind Shipping Company Sa, Silversea New Build One Limited, Silversea New Build Two Limited&Quot;the Silver Cloud&Quot; CA 5-Jul-2004
The shipping company was insured against loss of business following Acts of war. It sought to claim after the attack on America in September 2001.
Held: The policy had a limitation which applied ‘in the annual aggregate and in all’ which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insurance
Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.200216