Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
FORTUITY IN THE LAW OF MARINE INSURANCE
Howard Bennett *
This article addresses the meaning and significance of the concept of fortuity within the law of marine insurance. Voluntary conduct, naturally occurring losses and inherent vice, and inevitable losses are analysed, highlighting both the variable role and varied meanings of fortuity and considering the extent to which fortuity represents a presumption as to the interpretation of insurance contracts or an absolute restriction on the scope of insurance.
In insurance contract law, fortuity is a variable concept that addresses questions of both the likelihood of loss and the cause of loss. A loss may be said to lack fortuity for a variety of reasons: because it was bound to happen; because it happened naturally by reason of the condition of the insured property without external intervention; because causative external intervention, although present, achieved a certain standard of likelihood; or because the loss was the natural result of human intervention, usually by the assured. In most instances, however, the restriction on cover flowing from an idea of fortuity is not absolute, but a presumption born of the express wording of the policy or implicit in the natural understanding of the bargain embodied in an insurance contract. This article is concerned to evaluate the variable role of fortuity in contracts of marine insurance, although much of the discussion applies equally to non-marine policies.
A. FORTUITY IN THE COVER PROVIDED UNDER MARINE POLICIES
The role played by fortuity with respect to defining the scope of perils covered under policies of marine insurance differs between “all risks” and named perils cover, reflecting the differing nature of the cover provided. In the former, it functions as a gloss upon quasi-universal cover, while in the latter its significance varies according to the peril in issue.
1. All risks cover
The scope of an “all risks” policy was first examined judicially in Schloss Bros
v. Stevens
.1
Bales of merchandise were insured for inland transit in Colombia under a policy that contained a number of perils clauses including one covering, inter alia
, “all
* Hind Professor of Commercial Law, University of Nottingham. I am grateful to Peter MacDonald Eggers, Francis Rose and the anonymous referee for comments on a draft of this article. Responsibility for errors and omissions, of course, remains mine.
1. [1906] 2 KB 665.
LLOYD’S MARITIME AND COMMERCIAL LAW QUARTERLY
316