A ship was lost owing to encountering mines supposed to have broken loose from Russian minefields protecting the Finnish coast. Under insurance policies the ship was covered against marine risks and damage from explosions, but the insurers were exempt in the case of ‘capture, seizure, detention, and all other consequences of hostilities piracy, riots, civil commotions, and barratry excepted).’ In an action on the policies the appellants contended that the ship was lost by marine and not war risks, and that the clause warranted free from capture, and co., referred to hostile acts which amounted to taking possession of the ship insured and did not include consequences of hostilities which were not ejusdem generis with capture, seizure, and detention, such as the destruction of the ship by drifting mines. Held that the loss of the vessel was the direct consequence of hostilities, and the respondents were not liable therefor under the policies.
Decision of the Court of Appeal affirmed.
Lord Chancellor (Lord Birkenhead) Lords Haldane, Dunedin, and Buckmaster
[1919] UKHL 439, 57 SLR 439
Bailii
England and Wales
Transport, Insurance
Updated: 14 January 2022; Ref: scu.632790
