Summary

Introduction

1. The Claimant is the operator of two natural gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea ("NS1 Line 1" and "NS1 Line 2", together the "Pipelines").

2. The Defendants are insurance companies. The First Defendant is sued on its own behalf and as the representative of the other primary layer insurers. The Second Defendant is sued on its own behalf and as the representative of the other excess layer insurers.

3. On or about 26 September 2022, NS1 Line 1 and NS1 Line 2 were damaged by explosions at locations about 6.5 km apart (the "Explosions/Rupture Damage") and rendered inoperable.

4. NS1 Line 2 was also damaged in the form of an indentation (the "Dent") although the date of the damage is in dispute. The Defendants' case is that the Dent was caused by an explosion on or about 26 September 2022 as part of the same attack that caused the Explosions/Rupture Damage.

5. References in this judgment to the "Sabotage" or the "Attacks" are to the attacks that caused the Explosions/Rupture Damage and where the context admits, the attacks that are alleged to have caused the Dent. Similarly references in this judgment to the "Damage" are to the Rupture Damage and, where the context admits, the Dent.

6. The Defendants' case in essence is that any claim for the Damage is excluded under the express exclusions in the policies either as being occasioned by the war between Russia and Ukraine that began on or around 24 February 2022 (the "War") or caused by the act of a state or caused by the act of a state.

...

Conclusion

647. For all the reasons set out above I find on the evidence before this Court that:

a. the Damage to the Pipelines (both the Ruptures and the Dent) was "directly or indirectly occasioned by, happening through, or in consequence of war"; and

b. such Damage was excluded from cover by the terms of Exclusion 2.i of the Policies.

...