COMMERCIAL

Goods insured under marine policy intended to go to destination named in policy then on to another destination - goods misappropriated from customs compound at destination named in policy - cover not ceasing prior to misappropriation

Bayview Motors Ltd v Mitsui Marine & Fire Insurance Co Ltd and others: (Lords Justice Tuckey and Hale and Sir Denis Henry): 7 November 2002

The claimant motor dealer bought cars from a Japanese company.

The cars were shipped to Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, from where the claimant had arranged transhipment on by its own shippers.

The insurances were on the insurer's standard marine policy.

The assured was named as the company whose invoices showed the claimants as the consignees.

In 1997 two shipments of cars were misappropriated by customs officers from the customs compound in the port of Santo Domingo.

The claimant brought a claim under the policy.

The judge rejected the insurers' defence that the losses had occurred after cover had ended and/or by seizure.

The insurers appealed.

Nevil Phillips (instructed by Waltons & Morse) for the insurers.

Michael Nolan (instructed by Swinnertons) for the company.

Held, dismissing the appeal, that where goods insured under a marine policy were intended to go to the destination named in the policy and then on to another destination, the policy did not contemplate that there would be a final place of storage at the destination named in the policy such that cover would cease to apply; that, in any event, a customs compound could not be described as a final place of storage; and that the cover had therefore not ceased when the cars had been misappropriated, and there had not been seizure of the cars within the meaning of the policy.