header-logo header-logo

25 July 2025 / Helen Biggin
Issue: 8126 / Categories: Features , Aviation , Insurance / reinsurance , International
printer mail-detail

Take-off time for insurance pay-outs?

226383
Possessed or contingent, war risk or all-risk? Helen Biggin examines the fallout from the Russian aviation insurance claims
  • The English Commercial Court has ruled that Russian Government Resolution 311 was the proximate cause of loss, triggering war risk insurance payouts for lessors deprived of aircraft following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
  • The court confirmed coverage applied if the peril began during the policy period and led to permanent deprivation. Lessors were found to have taken sufficient steps to recover aircraft pre-GR 311.
  • The judgment has application beyond the aviation industry as it provides clarity on the interpretation of insurance policies, causation, loss, and the grip of peril doctrine.

The English Commercial Court has recently handed down a highly anticipated judgment of six consolidated multi-billion-dollar insurance claims arising out of the failure by Russian airlines to return leased aircraft to Western lessors following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 (Aercap Ireland Ltd v AIG Europe SA and others and other cases [2025] EWHC 1430 (Comm)).

The

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll