영국의 해상보험실무상 소말리아해적사고의 손해 취급에 관한 연구

The MIA 1906, s.78(1), the expenses in order to be recoverable must have been “properly incurred.” The underwriter is also liable in certain circumstances for expenses incurred by the assured in an attempt to avert or diminish loss covered by the policy, under provisions. This class of expenditure is commonly referred to as sue and labour expenses. Piracy is now included in standard clauses for hulls, cargoes and Kidnap & Ransom insurance, and they expressly provide that it is not excluded by the war exclusion clause. Similarly, the ICC(A) include it, within all risks, and except it from the war exclusion clause. However, the risk of piracy is not one of the perils covered under the (B) and (C) Clauses, but the extension of the cover for general average to avoidance of loss from any cause potentially extends the right to recover general average to some piracy situations. In Royal Boskalis, payment of ransom has not been illegal per se under English law and early cases support the view that payment of a ransom, in cash or kind, to obtain the release of ship and cargo is a general average matter. A distinction may also exist between the initial payment of a ransom and the subsequent payment or contribution to the resulting general average. In the Bunga Melati Dua, Steel J noted that a ransom payment was in principle recoverable as a sue and labour expense by reason of the decision in Royal Boskalis. It is understood that the recent spate of hijackings in Somalia have given rise to ransom demands generally paid by hull underwriters or P&I Clubs who then declare general average and seek reimbursement from cargo underwriters who are called upon to contribute in proportion to the value of the cargo which, in many instances, may exceed the value of the ship. The purpose of this study aims to analyse the treatment of loss incurred by Somali piracy under English insurance practice.