IUA Clauses eLibrary and London Market Model Wordings: Relationship with the LMA, JCC and Institute Cargo Clauses
Interlink編集部Overview
The IUA Clauses eLibrary is a public library for searching and reviewing model insurance and reinsurance clauses, wordings, and related documents published by the International Underwriting Association of London (IUA).
The IUA represents the London company market for international insurance and reinsurance. The eLibrary includes model wordings relating to marine, aviation, property, liability, reinsurance, and other classes of business.
However, a wording published in the eLibrary is not itself legislation, regulation, or a compulsory standard policy condition. It is a starting point or reference wording that insurers, reinsurers, brokers, insureds, and other contracting parties may use when designing the terms of an individual contract.
In an actual insurance claim, the relevant wording is not necessarily the general text appearing on the IUA or LMA website. The analysis must be based on the wording incorporated into the Policy, Insurance Schedule, Slip, Cover Note, Endorsements, special clauses, and other contractual documents.
Institute Cargo Clauses used in international cargo insurance should not be described simply as clauses independently created by the IUA. Within the London Market, the IUA, Lloyd’s Market Association (LMA), Joint Cargo Committee (JCC), and other market bodies may separately or jointly participate in the review, development, and publication of model wordings.
This article explains the status of the IUA Clauses eLibrary, the relationship among the IUA, LMA, JCC, and Institute Cargo Clauses, the contractual nature of model wordings, their connection with Japanese marine cargo insurance practice, and the method for confirming clause numbers, editions, dates, and amendments.
Specific Scope of This Article
| Item | What This Article Covers | What Other Articles Cover |
|---|---|---|
| IUA | Its position and history as the representative body of the London company market | Membership, internal governance, and individual committees |
| IUA Clauses eLibrary | The nature of published documents, search points, and practical cautions | Full interpretation of individual clauses and final application to a specific casualty |
| IUA, LMA, and JCC | The respective roles of the organisations and their relationship with cargo wordings | Committee proceedings, individual market policies, and member administration |
| Institute Cargo Clauses | Their status as standard cargo wordings used in the London Market and the need to identify the edition | Clause-by-clause analysis of ICC (A), ICC (B), and ICC (C) |
| Nature of model wordings | The difference among publication, reference, contractual incorporation, and amended adoption | Final legal interpretation of an individual contract |
| Insurance documents | Comparison of the Policy, Schedule, Slip, Cover Note, and Endorsements | Insurer-specific policy forms and internal underwriting procedures |
| Japanese marine cargo insurance | Why English ICC wordings are used in Japanese practice and how they should be reviewed | Premium calculation, declarations, open-cover procedures, and cargo claims |
| Reinsurance | A general explanation that model wordings may also be used in reinsurance contracts | Detailed interpretation of Claims Control, Claims Cooperation, and Follow the Settlements |
| War, Strikes, Cyber, and Sanctions | The need to review additional wordings separately from the basic cargo clauses | Detailed analysis of each peril, exclusion, and sanctions regime |
| Casualty analysis | The procedure for identifying the edition and amended wording incorporated into the contract | Final determination of cause, exclusion, causation, and claim amount |
| Professional review | Situations requiring confirmation from an insurer, broker, insurance agent, or lawyer | Legal advice and individual claim decisions |
Formation of the IUA and the History of the Institute of London Underwriters
The IUA was formed on 31 December 1998 through the merger of the London International Insurance and Reinsurance Market Association (LIRMA) and the Institute of London Underwriters (ILU).
The ILU was the historic representative body of the London company market in marine, aviation, and transport insurance. Its history dates back to 1884.
The word “Institute” in the name “Institute Cargo Clauses” can be understood as part of the historical lineage connected with the Institute of London Underwriters.
However, current Institute Cargo Clauses and cargo-related wordings must be understood through the present London Market structure, including the IUA company market, Lloyd’s market, LMA, and Joint Cargo Committee, rather than through the history of the ILU alone.
| Period | Organisation or Event | Main Significance | Connection with Current Practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1884 | The Institute of London Underwriters began operating as a formal association | It represented company-market interests in marine, aviation, and transport insurance | It forms part of the historical lineage of the term “Institute” |
| 1991 | LIRMA was formed through the merger of earlier non-marine associations | It supported non-marine insurance and reinsurance business | It became the foundation of the IUA’s non-marine and reinsurance activities |
| 31 December 1998 | LIRMA and the ILU merged to form the IUA | The marine and non-marine representative bodies of the London company market were combined | This created the organisational foundation of the present IUA |
| Present | The IUA publishes model wordings through its committees and eLibrary | It reviews and provides contractual wordings for insurance and reinsurance practice | Users can search names, references, dates, and wording texts |
Why Model Wordings Are Used
A London Market insurance or reinsurance contract may involve several insurers, reinsurers, underwriters, and brokers.
If each participant uses different wording, their understanding of insured perils, exclusions, duration, notification duties, claims procedures, and reinsurance recovery may not correspond.
Model wordings provide a common starting point for contract negotiation, underwriting decisions, and claims handling.
The objective of standardisation is not to impose identical terms on every contract. A wording may be amended, supplemented, or replaced according to the insured property, route, cargo, transportation method, sum insured, underwriting policy, and reinsurance arrangements.
| Purpose | Practical Benefit | Limitation | Item to Confirm |
|---|---|---|---|
| Create a common starting point | Underwriters, brokers, and clients can refer to the same text | Suitability for the individual risk is not guaranteed | Whether the wording fits the actual risk |
| Improve contract negotiation | The parties do not need to draft every provision from the beginning | Amendments may be overlooked | Whether amendments are clearly identified |
| Share recognised market language | International parties can more easily identify the terms | Market usage and contractual force are different concepts | Whether the wording was incorporated into the contract |
| Align participating markets | Common conditions are easier to use in a subscription placement | Different underwriters may agree to different qualifications | Whether Lead and Following Markets accepted the same terms |
| Provide a claims-review framework | Coverage, exclusions, and notification requirements can be identified | The wording must still be applied to the casualty facts | The edition, cause, and causation |
| Structure reinsurance terms | Cedants and reinsurers can compare primary and reinsurance wording | Primary payment does not automatically guarantee recovery | Claims Control and related conditions |
Relationship Among the IUA, LMA, Joint Cargo Committee, and ICC
| Organisation or Wording | Main Position | Relationship with Cargo Wordings | Practical Caution |
|---|---|---|---|
| IUA | Representative body for international insurance and reinsurance companies in the London company market | Reviews and publishes model wordings through IUA committees and related processes | Distinguish IUA wordings from Joint Committee wordings |
| LMA | Representative body for Managing Agents at Lloyd’s | Publishes LMA and Joint Committee model wordings | An LMA wording is not automatically incorporated into an individual contract |
| Joint Cargo Committee | Joint committee of cargo-underwriting representatives from the Lloyd’s and IUA company markets | Participates in the review, development, and issue of cargo-market wordings | Do not treat a JCC wording as solely an IUA or LMA wording |
| Institute Cargo Clauses | Standard cargo-insurance wordings widely used in international trade | ICC (A), ICC (B), and ICC (C) provide basic cargo cover structures | Confirm the edition, date, additional clauses, and amendments |
| Institute War Clauses | Additional clauses dealing with war risks affecting cargo | Provide war-risk cover separately from the ordinary ICC | Confirm duration, cancellation provisions, and relevant areas |
| Institute Strikes Clauses | Additional clauses dealing with strikes, riots, and related risks | Provide separate cover for strikes-related perils | They are not identical to War Clauses |
It is therefore inaccurate to conclude that every wording appearing on the IUA website was produced solely by the IUA or that the Institute Cargo Clauses are currently produced only by the IUA.
The reference number, issuing body, issue date, publication category, and related Circular should be reviewed to identify whether a document is an IUA wording, LMA wording, Joint Committee wording, or historic Institute wording.
Information Available in the IUA Clauses eLibrary
| Item | Information Available | Information Requiring Separate Confirmation | Practical Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Document title | The formal title of the model wording or clause | Whether the same title is incorporated into the insurance contract | Compare it with the Policy and Schedule |
| Reference number | The IUA, Joint Committee, or other market reference | Whether the contract states the correct number | Check the prefix, number, and revision identifier |
| Issue or revision date | The date on which the model wording was issued or amended | The date of the edition adopted in the contract | Compare it with the documents effective at placement |
| Wording text | The published standard text | Any deletion, addition, or amendment agreed by the parties | Compare it with Endorsements and Manuscript Wordings |
| Guidance or comment | Background or explanatory information | Whether the material has contractual force | Distinguish contractual wording from guidance |
| Class of business | Marine, aviation, property, liability, and other classifications | Whether the document is appropriate for the actual contract and risk | Compare the class and insured peril |
| Related wordings | Other clauses concerning the same or related risks | The order of priority among clauses | Review the policy as an integrated whole |
Matters That Cannot Be Determined from the eLibrary Alone
| Matter | Reason | Document to Review First | Response |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application to an individual contract | Publication does not automatically incorporate the wording | Policy, Schedule, and Slip | Confirm the incorporation language |
| Final amended wording | The parties may have amended the published text | Endorsement and Manuscript Wording | Identify differences from the model text |
| Final result of a casualty | Cause, time, location, and causation must be established | Casualty report, Survey Report, and claim documents | Apply the contractual wording to the facts |
| Interpretation under governing law | Interpretation may depend on governing law and jurisdiction | Governing Law and Jurisdiction clauses | Obtain legal advice where necessary |
| Individual underwriting intention | Publication does not reveal the insurer’s case-specific decision | Broker Presentation, quotation response, and correspondence | Review the placement record |
| Reinsurance recovery | The primary contract and reinsurance contract are separate contracts | Reinsurance wording and Claims Control provisions | Separate primary payment from reinsurance recovery |
| Application of a new edition to an existing contract | A later publication is not automatically retrospective | Inception date, renewal documents, and Endorsements | Confirm whether an amendment was agreed |
Contractual Nature of Model Wordings
A model wording is proposed contractual language. Publication on a website, frequent market usage, or reference during negotiation does not by itself incorporate the wording into a particular insurance contract.
Incorporation normally requires identification of the relevant wording in the Policy, Schedule, Slip, Cover Note, Endorsement, or another contractual document.
Where the parties adopt an amended model wording, the agreed amended wording, rather than the unmodified model text, is the starting point for analysis.
| Status | Contractual Meaning | Evidence | Caution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published on a website | Available as a model wording for market reference | Publication page and wording PDF | Publication alone does not incorporate it |
| Named in a quotation | May indicate the proposed basis of cover | Quotation and Broker Presentation | Confirm edition, date, and amendments |
| Specified in a Slip or Schedule | Likely to form part of the agreed conditions | Signed Slip and Schedule | Check consistency with the final Policy and Endorsements |
| Attached to the Policy | Forms part of the contractual documentation | Policy Wording and clause booklet | Confirm that the correct edition is attached |
| Amended by Endorsement | The Endorsement modifies the affected provision | Endorsement and Amendment | Identify each deletion, replacement, and addition |
| Replaced by manuscript wording | The bespoke wording applies instead of the model wording | Manuscript Wording | Prepare a comparison against the model text |
Institute Cargo Clauses in Japanese Marine Cargo Insurance
Institute Cargo Clauses are also widely used as the underlying English conditions for Japanese marine cargo insurance policies.
International cargo transportation may involve sellers, buyers, banks, freight forwarders, shipping lines, insurers, and claims agents in several countries. Internationally recognised English wordings provide a common language through which these parties can identify the insurance conditions.
However, a Japanese insurance contract based on ICC is not necessarily composed only of the ICC text. Japanese supplementary provisions, special clauses, insurer-specific Endorsements, the Insurance Schedule, and individual underwriting conditions may also apply.
Depending on the contract, ICC editions from 1963, 1982, and 2009 remain in use. Even where the condition is described as ICC (A), the wording may differ according to the edition. The applicable edition must therefore be identified.
| Item | Reason for Confirmation | Main Evidence | Response if Unclear |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICC category | ICC (A), ICC (B), and ICC (C) provide different cover structures | Schedule and Policy | Confirm the lettered condition |
| Edition and date | The 1963, 1982, and 2009 wordings differ | Clause title and date | Do not refer only to “ICC (A)” |
| War Clauses | War risks are addressed separately from the ordinary ICC | Institute War Clauses | Confirm attachment and edition |
| Strikes Clauses | Strikes-related risks are addressed in separate clauses | Institute Strikes Clauses | Distinguish them from War Clauses |
| Japanese supplementary provisions | Additional conditions may apply in Japanese market practice | Supplementary Provisions and special clauses | Do not rely on the ICC text alone |
| Individual Endorsements | Cover may be extended or restricted for the cargo or transit | Endorsement schedule | Compare each Endorsement with the model text |
| Duration | The warehouse-to-warehouse period may be affected by individual conditions | Transit Clause and Schedule | Identify the precise beginning and end of cover |
Why the Reference Number, Edition, and Date Matter
The formal title, reference number, edition, issue date, revision date, and incorporation date should be confirmed whenever a model wording is used.
Similar or identical titles may exist in several editions. A wording issued after the contract was entered into does not automatically replace the edition incorporated at inception.
| Identifier | Item to Confirm | Possible Problem | Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formal title | The complete wording title | A wording for another peril or class may be selected | Compare the title exactly |
| Reference number | The JC, LMA, IUA, or other identifier | A similarly named wording may be confused | Include the prefix in the review |
| Issue date | The date of the relevant wording | An old and new edition may be confused | Check the heading and final page |
| Revision identifier | A letter or other revision mark | The pre-revision wording may be used | Review the Circular and revision information |
| Contract inception | The contract year in which the wording was adopted | A later wording may be applied retrospectively | Review the Schedule and renewal documents |
| Endorsement effective date | The effective date of a mid-term amendment | The applicable wording before and after amendment may be confused | Confirm the Endorsement effective date |
| Subject matter | The cargo, route, period, or peril to which the wording applies | The wording may be applied outside its scope | Review the Schedule and definitions |
Unmodified, Amended, and Bespoke Wordings
| Method | Status of the Wording | Main Benefit | Main Risk | Method of Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unmodified adoption | The published model text is used without change | The parties can use recognised market language | The wording may not fit the individual risk | Compare the published text with the contract |
| Partial amendment | Specific provisions or definitions are changed | The wording can be adapted to the risk | The effect of the amendment may extend beyond the amended sentence | List every deletion, addition, and replacement |
| Additional Endorsement | The model text remains and additional terms are added | Specific risks can be added or restricted | The model text and Endorsement may conflict | Review priority and inconsistency provisions |
| Bespoke wording | The insurer or parties use separately drafted wording | The contract can be tailored in detail | It may be mistaken for equivalent standard wording | Prepare a comparison with the model wording |
| Combination of wordings | Basic, War, Strikes, Cyber, and other clauses are combined | Several risks can be structured within one policy | Overlap or inconsistency may arise | Confirm priority and the scope of each clause |
Documents to Be Reviewed
| Document | Main Function | Item to Confirm | Action if a Problem Is Identified |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy | Records the basic insurance contract | Insured, period, sum insured, cargo, and basic conditions | Compare it with the Schedule and Slip |
| Insurance Schedule | Lists the principal individual conditions | Applicable wordings, edition, deductible, and special terms | Confirm reference numbers, not only titles |
| Slip | Records placing terms and market participations | Lead, Following Markets, terms, and signatures | Confirm accurate transcription into the Policy |
| Cover Note | Records cover before the formal Policy is issued | Interim terms, duration, and relationship with the final Policy | Identify changes in the final documentation |
| Endorsement | Adds, deletes, or changes contractual conditions | Affected provision, effective date, and priority | Ask the issuer to clarify an uncertain amendment |
| Policy Wording | Contains cover, exclusions, conditions, and claim requirements | Full text, definitions, cross-references, and governing law | Obtain the complete wording rather than an extract |
| Broker Presentation | Presents risk information and requested conditions | Disclosures, underwriting assumptions, and requested extensions | Compare it with the final contract |
| Clause schedule | Lists the documents incorporated into the contract | Title, reference, date, and attachment | Obtain missing wordings before inception |
Situations Where This Article Applies
| Situation | Main Issue | Evidence | Direction of Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Designing cargo cover | Selecting the basic and additional clauses | Proposed terms, ICC, War, and Strikes clauses | Select wording appropriate for the cargo, route, and transit |
| Presenting a risk to the London Market | Using a model or bespoke wording | Broker Presentation and draft Slip | Use the model as a starting point and identify amendments |
| Reviewing a Japanese English-language policy | The ICC edition and Japanese additions are unclear | Policy, Schedule, and clause schedule | Read the ICC and supplementary terms together |
| Handling a casualty | Whether the loss is covered or excluded | Casualty evidence and incorporated wording | Use the contract wording rather than the eLibrary alone |
| Model and Policy texts differ | Which wording has contractual priority | Endorsement and Manuscript Wording | Identify the wording actually agreed |
| Adopting a new edition at renewal | The effect of changes from the old edition | Old and new wordings and renewal documents | Review differences and compatibility with existing clauses |
| Seeking reinsurance recovery | Whether the reinsurer must follow the primary settlement | Reinsurance contract and Claims Control clauses | Separate primary and reinsurance obligations |
| War, Cyber, or Sanctions issues arise | Priority of additional cover or exclusion wording | War, Cyber, and Sanctions clauses | Separate the cause of loss from the scope of each clause |
Situations That Cannot Be Decided from This Article Alone
| Situation | Reason | Document to Review First | Response |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coverage of a specific casualty | Cause, causation, and evidence are required | Contract wording, Survey Report, and casualty documents | Notify the insurer or insurance agent |
| Legal interpretation of a clause | Governing law, authority, and negotiation history may apply | Governing Law clause and placement record | Consult a maritime insurance lawyer |
| Claim amount | Insured value, loss amount, deductible, and expenses must be calculated | Invoice, Survey Report, and repair estimate | Follow the insurer’s adjustment process |
| Special cargo condition | Temperature, corrosion, used goods, or deck carriage terms may apply | Individual Endorsements and cargo information | Design conditions before underwriting |
| Sanctioned transaction | Several sanctions regimes and payment restrictions may apply | Sanctions Clause and party or vessel details | Conduct legal and compliance review |
| Reinsurance dispute | The primary and reinsurance contracts and facts may differ | Reinsurance contract and claims notices | Consult a reinsurance specialist or lawyer |
| Conflicting clauses | Priority and the effect of special terms must be determined | Complete Policy and Order of Precedence | Map the interaction among the clauses |
| Old or new edition dispute | Inception and amendment history must be identified | Schedule, renewal documents, and Endorsements | Identify the edition incorporated into the contract |
Practical Review Flow
- Identify the class of insurance, cargo, route, transportation method, and relevant perils.
- Collect the Policy, Schedule, Slip, Cover Note, and all Endorsements.
- List every wording title, reference number, edition, and date appearing in the documents.
- Locate the corresponding published text in the IUA Clauses eLibrary, LMA resources, or Joint Committee publications.
- Compare the published text with the wording incorporated into the contract.
- Record every deletion, addition, replacement, and bespoke provision.
- Separate the scope of the ICC, War, Strikes, Cyber, Sanctions, and other clauses.
- Confirm the order of priority where the basic wording and an Endorsement conflict.
- Place the inception date, Endorsement effective dates, and casualty date in chronological order.
- For a casualty, identify the cause, location, time of discovery, and mitigation action.
- Distinguish the general meaning of the model text from the amended contract wording.
- Submit written questions to the insurer, broker, or insurance agent where the wording is unclear.
- Consult a maritime insurance lawyer for a legal-interpretation or substantial-value dispute.
- Retain the confirmed edition, published text, comparison, and written responses in the contract file.
Cases Commonly Problematic in Practice
| Case | Main Cause or Issue | Evidence | Decision Point | Initial Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Policy states only “ICC (A)” | The edition and date are unidentified | Schedule, clause schedule, and underwriting response | Whether the 1963, 1982, or 2009 edition applies | Obtain written confirmation from the insurer |
| The Policy differs from the IUA text | An Endorsement or bespoke amendment applies | Published wording, Policy Wording, and Endorsement | The wording actually agreed by the parties | Prepare a comparison table |
| The insured assumes ICC (A) covers every loss | Exclusions and duration have been overlooked | ICC (A) and special clauses | “All Risks” is not unconditional cover | Compare the cause with the exclusions |
| War Clauses were not attached | War cover was assumed to be part of the ICC | Schedule and War Clauses | War risk requires separate wording | Confirm attachment before inception |
| The latest wording is applied to an older contract | The current website edition is confused with the contract edition | Inception date and historic wording | The edition incorporated into the casualty contract | Obtain the wording used at inception |
| Guidance is treated as a contractual clause | Explanatory material and wording text are confused | Guidance and Policy Wording | Whether the material was contractually incorporated | Separate the legal status of each document |
| Several Endorsements conflict | Priority and effective dates are unclear | All Endorsements and Order of Precedence | Priority cannot be determined solely by publication date | Request a consolidated final wording |
| Reinsurance recovery is denied after primary payment | A Claims Control or prior-consent requirement was breached | Reinsurance contract and notice records | Follow the Settlements is not the only relevant clause | Preserve the notification chronology |
| Japanese supplementary provisions were overlooked | Only the ICC text was reviewed | Supplementary Provisions and special clauses | The entire Japanese policy must be read together | Recheck the clause schedule |
| Payment is suspended under a Sanctions Clause | Coverage and payment restrictions are confused | Sanctions Clause and party details | Separate contractual coverage from legal ability to pay | Refer the matter to legal and compliance teams |
Application Scenario 1: ICC (A) and a Bespoke Endorsement
The following is a hypothetical scenario explaining the difference between a model wording and the actual contract wording.
Precision machinery is exported from Kobe to Singapore with an insured value of JPY 48 million. The Schedule states that ICC (A) 1/1/09 is the basic condition.
After arrival, condensation is found inside sealed packing and corrosion damage is discovered within the machinery. The cargo owner demands payment of the full loss, arguing that ICC (A) provides All Risks cover.
The insurer relies on a bespoke Endorsement excluding certain corrosion losses caused by temperature change and condensation.
The cargo owner replies that only ICC (A) was explained during quotation and that the additional restriction was not adequately disclosed.
Review confirms that the insurer-specific Endorsement, which is not part of the published ICC (A) text, was expressly incorporated through the Schedule.
The analysis must therefore address whether the Endorsement was validly incorporated, which provision it amended, the explanation and agreement history, the direct cause of corrosion, and the adequacy of packing.
Application Scenario 2: Unidentified ICC (A) Edition
Machine tools valued at JPY 72 million are exported from Yokohama to Rotterdam. The Policy states only “Institute Cargo Clauses (A)” without an issue date.
The cargo is damaged during temporary storage, and the end of the insured transit becomes disputed.
The cargo owner relies on the 2009 ICC (A) and argues that cover continued. The insurer states that the relevant open-cover contract used the 1982 wording and that cover had already terminated.
Although the Policy itself does not state the issue date, the renewal Broker Slip, underwriting response, and clause schedule identify ICC (A) 1/1/82.
The appropriate wording is therefore the 1982 edition actually incorporated into the casualty contract, rather than the 2009 edition that may be more readily available online.
Even where a clause is abbreviated, the ICC category, issue date, and edition should be recorded in the contractual documents.
Application Scenario 3: Claims Control and Reinsurance Recovery
The following is a hypothetical reinsurance scenario.
A Japanese primary insurer settles a wet-damage claim involving electronic components transported from Thailand to Japan for JPY 120 million.
The primary insurer argues that the reinsurer must follow the settlement because the reinsurance contract contains a Follow the Settlements provision.
The reinsurer refuses recovery, arguing that a Claims Control Clause required prior consultation and written consent for a substantial settlement and that adequate notice was not provided until after settlement.
The primary insurer replies that an initial casualty report had been sent and that the reinsurer was aware of the loss.
The analysis must consider the actual Claims Control, Claims Cooperation, and Follow the Settlements wordings incorporated into the reinsurance contract, the notice destination and timing, the consent requirement, and whether the reinsurer had a real opportunity to participate.
The use of a model wording does not by itself guarantee recovery of a primary settlement.
Common Misconceptions
| Misconception | Correct Analysis | Practical Caution |
|---|---|---|
| Every wording on the IUA website is solely an IUA wording | Joint Committee and other market wordings may also be published | Review the reference, issuing body, and Circular |
| An IUA model wording is legislation | It is proposed contractual language | Confirm contractual incorporation |
| A market-standard wording automatically applies | Frequent market use does not create automatic incorporation | Review the Policy, Schedule, and Slip |
| The edition is irrelevant if the Policy states ICC (A) | The 1963, 1982, and 2009 editions differ | State the issue date |
| ICC (A) covers every type of loss | Exclusions, duration, and conditions apply | Do not treat All Risks as unconditional cover |
| War and Strikes risks are automatically included in the ICC | They are structured through separate clauses | Confirm attachment of the additional clauses |
| The current website edition should be used for every casualty | The edition incorporated into the contract must be used | Confirm the inception date and adopted edition |
| An amendment to the model text is invalid | An agreed amendment may form part of the contract | Review the Endorsement and agreement history |
| Guidance has the same force as the wording | Guidance and contractual text have different status | Confirm whether it was incorporated |
| A Japanese cargo policy can be analysed from the ICC alone | Japanese supplementary provisions and insurer-specific terms may apply | Review the complete Policy |
| A reinsurer must always follow a primary payment | Notice, consent, and Claims Control conditions may apply | Separate the primary and reinsurance contracts |
| The same reference number always means identical text | A revision identifier or contractual amendment may apply | Compare the number, date, and complete wording |
Decision Checklist
| Situation | Party to Consult | Item to Confirm | Action if a Problem Is Identified |
|---|---|---|---|
| Designing insurance conditions | Insurer, broker, and insurance agent | Risk, basic wording, additional clauses, and exclusions | Design terms appropriate for the cargo and route |
| Obtaining a quotation | Quotation issuer | Formal title, reference number, issue date, and edition | Obtain written confirmation rather than relying on abbreviations |
| Entering into the contract | Insurer and broker | Schedule, Slip, Policy Wording, and attached clauses | Obtain missing documents before inception |
| Reviewing ICC | Insurer and insurance agent | ICC (A), (B), or (C) and its issue date | Distinguish the 1963, 1982, and 2009 editions |
| Reviewing additional clauses | Insurer | War, Strikes, Cyber, Sanctions, and bespoke Endorsements | Confirm priority over the basic wording |
| Comparing the model text | Broker and insurance agent | Differences between the published and contractual text | Prepare a comparison table |
| Renewing the contract | Insurer and broker | Changes from the old edition and consistency with existing clauses | Explain the effect of each change to the insured |
| Handling a casualty | Insurer, insurance agent, and claims specialists | Edition, cover, exclusions, and notice requirements | Use the contract edition rather than the latest publication |
| Policy and Slip differ | Broker and insurer | Final agreed terms and any documentation error | Obtain a corrective Endorsement |
| Several Endorsements apply | Insurer | Effective dates, affected provisions, and priority | Request a consolidated final wording |
| Notifying reinsurers | Reinsurance personnel and broker | Claims Control, notification deadline, and consent requirements | Obtain required approval before settlement or payment |
| Reviewing sanctions | Legal, compliance, and insurer | Parties, vessel, cargo, route, and financial institutions | Separate contractual coverage from payment restrictions |
| Legal interpretation is disputed | Maritime insurance lawyer | Governing law, jurisdiction, wording interpretation, and placement history | Obtain advice before a notification or litigation time bar expires |
When to Consult an Insurer, Broker, or Insurance Agent
- The Policy states a clause title without a reference number or issue date
- The published IUA or LMA text differs from the Policy wording
- Several Endorsements amend the same provision
- The priority among the basic wording and War, Strikes, Cyber, or Sanctions clauses is unclear
- A change from an old to a new edition has not been explained to the insured
- A bespoke exclusion is added to a policy otherwise described as ICC (A)
- Temperature-controlled goods, used goods, machinery, deck cargo, storage risks, or exhibition goods are insured
- The relationship between Japanese supplementary provisions and the English wording is unclear
- The complete set of incorporated wordings cannot be obtained after a casualty
- It is unclear whether notice, consultation, or prior consent is required under the reinsurance contract
When to Consult a Maritime Insurance Lawyer
- Priority between the model text and an amended wording is disputed
- Contractual incorporation of a clause is disputed
- Interpretation may differ according to governing law or jurisdiction
- Coverage, exclusion, or causation is disputed in a substantial-value casualty
- The disclosure or explanation duties of an insurer, broker, or insurance agent are disputed
- Several insurance or reinsurance contracts relate to the same loss
- Reinsurance recovery is denied because of an alleged Claims Control breach
- A Sanctions Clause prevents payment despite an alleged contractual obligation
- A contractual notice period, time bar, or litigation deadline is approaching
- Market understanding of a model wording conflicts with the literal contractual wording
Summary
The IUA Clauses eLibrary is an important resource for locating model insurance and reinsurance wordings used in the London company market.
The IUA was formed in 1998 through the merger of LIRMA and the Institute of London Underwriters. The name “Institute Cargo Clauses” has a historical lineage connected with the ILU, but current cargo wordings must be understood through the broader London Market structure, including the LMA and Joint Cargo Committee.
Model wordings published by the IUA, LMA, or a Joint Committee are not legislation or compulsory policy conditions. They become contractual terms only to the extent that they are incorporated and agreed in an individual contract.
For an actual casualty, the relevant documents are the Policy, Schedule, Slip, Cover Note, Policy Wording, and Endorsements applicable to the casualty contract, not merely the latest wording available online.
The formal title, reference number, edition, issue date, revision identifier, and effective date should be confirmed, and differences between the published model and the contract wording should be recorded.
Japanese marine cargo insurance contracts may use ICC editions from 1963, 1982, or 2009. War Clauses, Strikes Clauses, Japanese supplementary provisions, and individual Endorsements may also apply.
The use of ICC (A), an IUA or LMA model wording, or language described as market standard does not by itself determine whether an individual casualty is covered. The incorporated wording, cause, causation, duration, and exclusions must be reviewed.
Where the reference, edition, amendment, or priority cannot be confirmed internally, written clarification should be obtained from the insurer, broker, or insurance agent. A maritime insurance lawyer should be considered for substantial disputes, reinsurance recovery issues, or questions of legal interpretation.
