The Middle East conflict: Contractual and insurance implications in Marine Insurance P&I Club News 04/03/2026 Following coordinated military action by Israel and the United States against Iran and the cancellation of war risks cover for parts of the Persian Gulf, shipowners and charterers face immediate contractual and insurance exposure. This article outlines the principal issues arising under English law, including safety obligations, war risks clauses, frustration and cargo liabilities. On 28 February 2026, Israel and the US launched a coordinated attack on various sites in Iran. Whilst many of the targets are inland, attacks have also been reported on a number of Iranian ports and on 1 March 2026, the UK insurance market issued a Notice of Cancellation of War Risks Insurance to reflect the increase in the level of risk associated with the area and higher Additional War Risk Premium Rates applying in the following areas: • Iran and Iranian waters including coastal waters up to 12 nautical miles offshore • Persian/Arabian Gulf and adjacent waters including the Gulf of Oman and waters west of the line from Oman’s territorial limit off Cape al-Ḥadd at 22°42.5’N, 59°54.5’E northeast to the Iran-Pakistan border at 25°10.5’N, 61°37.5’E If a ship is proceeding to the affected area, owners will need to make new arrangements for additional war risks insurance; for ships already within the area, the existing rates are likely still to apply, depending on the precise terms of the insurance. As a result of these developments, we are receiving enquiries arising from owners and charterers who disagree about whether or not to proceed to the Persian Gulf littoral states due to the conflict in the area. We therefore outline some of the Frequently Asked Questions primarily related to Defence issues below. While many questions will depend on the specific facts, we provide some general guidance which will be supplemented as events unfold. These answers are based on the charterparty being subject to English law. The answers may be different if the charterparty is subject to another legal system. The below is accurate as at the time of publishing but, the situation remains fluid and fast-moving. Issues of safety The Master’s right to take steps to protect the safety of the crew and the ship is enshrined in SOLAS: International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea – Chapter V – Safety of navigation as follows: The owner, the charterer, the company operating the ship as defined in regulation IX/1, or any other person shall not prevent or restrict the master of the ship from taking or executing any decision which, in the master’s professional judgement, is necessary for safety of life at sea and protection of the marine environment. As such, the Master has the ultimate say as to whether or not the ship will undertake a voyage which is potentially unsafe. However, the financial consequences of such a decision will depend on a party’s contractual commitments. General contractual considerations The classic definition of unsafety from The Eastern City case applies to both voyage and time charters as follows: “A port will not be safe unless, in the relevant period of time, the particular ship can reach it, use it and return from it without, in the absence of some abnormal occurrence, being exposed to danger which cannot be avoided by good navigation and seamanship…” However, the consequences of unsafety are different. 1. If the charterparty contains a safe por