The Effect on Aviation Insurance Coverage in the Event of
Nuclear War
(read this article: the prospects are not as remote as you
might think!).
Those of us who watch the BBC, CNN and Sky News on our TVs
have been hearing about the build-up of tensions between
India and Pakistan…and not on the cricket field!
The situation appears to be worsening on a daily basis and,
as I write this article, artillery shells have been flying backwards and
forwards.
The websites of various news agencies are full of comments
regarding the prospect of this current hostility between those two nuclear
powers spooling up into the unimaginable….nuclear war.
There has not been a hostile detonation of a weapon of war
since August 9th, 1945, when the USA nuked
Nagasaki, the second Japanese city to be flattened with a nuclear
bomb, following the destruction of
Hiroshima just 3 days previously.
Almost 57 years have passed and, with the exception of the Cuban missile
crisis in the 1960s, the world has never really needed to seriously consider the
possibility of nuclear war.
Now, it seems, a very real possibility has reared its ugly head over the
perpetual fight between India and Pakistan over the “ Kashmir”
issue.
Hands up those who could point out where the
Kashmir is with any accuracy?
I thought not!
“So what has all this got to do with aviation insurance in
South Africa?”, I hear you ask, as you struggle
to stifle a yawn of sheer boredom!
Quite a lot, actually.
All aircraft insurance policies carry a General Exclusion, which reads,
in one version or another, as follows:
This
Policy does not cover claims caused by….any hostile detonation of any weapon of
war employing atomic or nuclear fission and/or fusion or other like reaction or
radioactive force or matter.
“So what?”, you ask,
“My aircraft isn’t likely to be caught in any nuclear fall-out from a bomb going
off in India or Pakistan, so why should I be concerned?”
True. It’s unlikely.
However, the chances are you also
carry “War Risks” insurance. This
coverage is usually provided in terms of a separate “ Hull”
policy and an extension to your “Legal Liability” policy.
If you take a look at your “Hull War
Risks” policy, you will find the following (again, the actual wording may vary
from policy to policy, but the gist is the same):
This Policy excludes loss, damage or expense directly or indirectly arising out
of any detonation of any weapon of war employing atomic or nuclear fission
and/or fusion or other like reaction or radioactive force or matter whether
hostile or otherwise.
You’re still not impressed, I can tell!
OK then; let’s now take a look at the
automatic cancellation provisions that appear in Hull War Risks policies as well
as War Risks endorsements to Legal Liability coverages:
The Hull War Risks policy includes the following:
This Policy is subject to automatic review (by Insurers) of the rate of premium
and/or conditions and/or Geographical Limits effective on the expiry of 7 days
from the time of any hostile detonation of any weapon of war employing atomic or
nuclear fission and/or fusion or other like reaction or radioactive force or
matter wheresoever or whensoever such detonation may occur and whether or not
the insured Aircraft may be directly affected.
In the event of the review of the rate of premium and/or conditions
and/or Geographical Limits not being accepted by the Insured then at the expiry
of the said 7 days, this Policy shall become cancelled at that date.
The War Risks extension to a Legal Liability policy says:
So, putting it in a nutshell, if India and Pakistan start
lobbing nuclear weapons at each other (or, more accurately, if either one of
them does: there doesn’t have to be missiles going in both directions), all
aviation War Risks coverage around the world will immediately be cancelled, or
automatically put on 7 days’ notice of cancellation (without the need for
Insurers to actually tell anyone), while Insurers reassess their positions.
However, following the events of
9/11, Insurers are likely to offer any reinstatement of coverage at sharply
increased cost, irrespective of how remote your particular exposure might appear
to be.
There again, I guess that this will be the least of our
problems! Here’s hoping that
commonsense will prevail and all the experts will be proved wrong.
|