4.1 Introduction
Since the ITCH/IHC are based on the named perils principle and do not mention intervention by state power, the implication should be that such interventions are not covered by the insurance against marine perils. Even so, the clauses contain the following paramount war exclusion:(1) ITCH 1983/1995 clause 24, cf. IHC 2001/2003 clause 29.2.
In no case shall this insurance cover loss damage liability or expense caused by
….
24.2 capture seizure arrest restraint detainment (barratry and piracy excepted), and the consequences thereof or any attempt thereat
This means that the cover provided according to NP Cl. 2-8 on political risk is not covered by ITCH. The IWSCH 1995, however, covers the following perils:
capture seizure arrest restraint or detainment, and the consequences thereof or any attempt thereat
…
confiscation or expropriation
but with the following exclusions:
requisition or pre-emption
capture seizure arrest restraint detainment confiscation or expropriation by or under the order of the government or any public or local authority of the country in which the Vessel is owned or registered
arrest restraint detainment confiscation or expropriation under quarantine regulations or by reason of infringement of any customs or trading regulations
the operation of ordinary judicial process, failure to provide security or to pay any fine or penalty or any financial cause
The content of these provisions is further outlined below in 4.2 and 4.3.
IWSCH 1995, similarly to NP Cl. 15-11, provides cover for detainment in Cl. 3:
In the event that the Vessel shall have been the subject of capture seizure arrest restraint detainment confiscation or expropriation, and the Assured shall thereby have lost the free use and disposal of the Vessel for a continuous period of 12 months then for the purpose of ascertaining whether the Vessel is a constructive total loss the Assured shall be deemed to have been deprived of the possession of the Vessel without any likelihood of recovery.
IWSCH 1995 does not contain a blocking and trapping clause similarly to NP Cl. 15-12, but the following clause is much used:(2) LPO-444-For-use-with-Institute-War-and-Strikes-Clauses-Hulls-1-11.
It is hereby agreed that the Inability of the Vessel to sail from any port, canal, waterway or other place to the high seas for a continuous period of 12 months as a result of the closure of the connecting channel to all vessels of such size or draft is within the term “restraint” appearing in Clause 3 of the Institute War and Strikes Clauses – Hulls 1.11.95 provided that such closure has arisen through the blockage of the waterway by a warlike act, or act of national defence.
The content of these provisions will depend on the definition of the different interventions as described in 4.2 and 4.3 below.