Start The comprehensive internet dating handbook

The comprehensive internet dating handbook

However, the Plan all risk principle is more beneficial to the assured than the English named peril principle in the event of any dispute or uncertainty. 2-12, sub-clause 2, it is the insurer who bears the burden of proving that the loss has been caused by an excepted peril, while under the English conditions, the burden is on the assured to prove that the loss was caused by a named peril.

If the foreign hull conditions have not been accepted in writing by the loss of hire insurer, the loss of hire insurance will be triggered only when any damage sustained by the vessel would have been covered under the Plan, regardless of whether the foreign hull cover on point is more extensive or restricted than the Plan.

The loss of hire insurer may deny cover because the damage to the vessel is not recoverable under the Plan.

In this case, the court did not actually have to apply any burden of proof rules because the facts indicated that the cause of the damage was wear and tear, which was excluded under the ITC conditions.

The damage was therefore not recoverable under the actual hull conditions, which by express agreement replaced the reference to the Plan, and there was thus no claim under the loss of hire insurance.

If the ship is outside the trading area covered by the foreign hull insurance but within the trading area covered by the Plan, the loss of hire insurer will therefore be liable, even if no compensation is payable under the hull insurance.

The assured may conceivably change his hull insurance in the course of the insurance period under the loss of hire insurance, for instance from Plan conditions to English ITCH conditions.

Under the Plan conditions it is important to look for the exceptions rather than the perils covered.

The real difference between the perils covered under the various systems is not great and may be unimportant to the assured if no dispute arises.

This means that damage to the vessel and any loss of income caused by grounding, fire, explosion, collision or perils of the sea such as heavy weather etc. 2-9, there will be no overlap or gap in the cover between marine and war risk insurance under the Plan.

Thus, if a peril is not a war peril pursuant to Cl. 2‑8, unless excepted pursuant to letters (b) to (d).

If the choice of foreign law is combined with a corresponding foreign jurisdiction clause, the question will be decided by the foreign court which may favour its own legal system to the provisions of the Plan.