MT Polar - UK Supreme Court guidance on application of war risks clauses UK Supreme Court guidance on application of war risks clauses. Owen Fry article discusses a recent judgment of the UK Supreme Court, which offers insight on the limitations of some war risks provisions, and some guidance on the exercise of rights to avoid the Suez Canal, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden in the face of threats by Houthi militia. A must-read for owners and operators navigating these challenging waters. Articles Owen Fry Published: January 18, 2024 Contact author Download article pdf Herculito Maritime Limited v Gunvor International BV [2024] UKSC 2 involved claims for general average contributions following the seizure of the MT Polar by pirates when transiting the designated High-Risk Area in the Gulf of Aden in 2010. The vessel was released against payment of a ransom, a contribution to which owners sought to recover in general average from cargo interests. The main argument raised by the cargo interests was that the relevant voyage charter (which they said had been incorporated into the bills of lading) included various insurance provisions which created a complete code for the recovery of losses arising from certain risks that had been insured against. According to this complete code, owners could look only to their insurers for recovery. If correct, this would preclude owners from claiming GA contributions from cargo interests for losses arising from piracy, which was a risk covered by insurance which had been taken out in accordance with the charterparty clauses.  Cargo interests cited previous cases in which it had been held that such an arrangement had arisen, most of which had no bearing on the present case except for The Evia (No. 2) [1982] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 307, where it was held by the House of Lords that the war risks regime in the charterparty did create a complete code. The time charter in that case was based on the Baltime form, which included a clause giving owners exte