Research On Legal Issues Concerning Sanctions Limitation And Exclusion Clause In Marine Insurance Contracts

Unilateralism is prevalent in today’s international society,and anti-globalization and neoconservative trends are on the rise.Economic sanctions have become the main economic means used by the United Nations,the European Union and the United States to achieve political and diplomatic goals.In marine insurance,the complex sanctions environment is overwhelmed by insurance practitioners.In order to effectively prevent the risk of economic sanctions,standard clauses specifically for economic sanctions have emerged in the international insurance market to exempt insurers from possible legal liabilities,which are collectively referred to as sanctions limitation and exclusion clauses.The use of sanctions limitation and exclusion clause in marine insurance contracts is new.Although it plays an important role in ensuring the legal operation of insurance transactions,safeguarding the legitimate interests of marine insurers and promoting the compliance of insurance enterprises with sanctions,in judicial practice,there has always been controversy over the validity and legal application of sanctions limitation and exclusion clause.The effectiveness of a sanctions limitation and exclusion clause depends more on the ideology of the place of jurisdiction of the insurance contract,and the factors examined for the validity of the sanctions limitation and exclusion clause vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.British courts tend to examine the legal nature and effectiveness of sanctions,using methods such as public policy and interest analysis to comprehensively analyze the impact of sanction laws on the effectiveness of sanctions limitation and exclusion clause when dealing with third-party sanctions laws.Influenced by the German theory of facts,Chinese courts tend to consider economic sanctions at the level of legal facts,which is conducive to the parties raising a force majeure defense.The London insurance market is the world’s important insurance centre,and the UK has formed specific rules for interpreting sanctions exclusions in judicial practice.When interpreting a sanctions limitation and exclusion clause,English courts usually adopt the method of interpretation,meaning and reasonable third party to define the nature of sanctions limitation and exclusion clause and discuss the legal consequences thereof separately.When the validity of the sanctions limitation and exclusion clause is in doubt,the English court upholds the insurer’s refusal defence on the grounds that the economic sanction constitutes force majeure,frustration of the contract or breach of the implied warranty.In China,judicial rules dealing with sanctions limitation and exclusion clause have been preliminarily formed,and there are also cases that support insurers exempting their insurance liability due to sanctions limitation and exclusion clause.Compared with the United Kingdom,the interpretation and nature determination of the sanctions limitation and exclusion clause in Chinese courts is insufficient,and it is necessary to improve the contract interpretation rules and reasonably apply interpretation methods.In order to balance the interests of the parties,the court needs to reasonably allocate the burden of proof between the parties to the contract.When the validity of the sanctions limitation and exclusion clause is in doubt,the Chinese court recognizes the impact of economic sanctions on the performance of marine insurance contracts and reviews the legality of whether they constitute force majeure or change of circumstances to achieve relief against marine insurers.