In order to deliver a personalised, responsive service and to improve the site, we remember and store information about how you use it. This is done using simple text files called cookies which sit on your computer. By continuing to use this site and access its features, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
To find out more about the way Informa Law uses cookies please go to our Cookie Policy page. Close

CHAPTER 11 Capture

Marine War Risks

Page 83 CHAPTER 11 Capture DIFFERENCES BETWEEN “CAPTURE” AND “SEIZURE” 11.1 Whilst “capture” and “seizure” both involve depriving the insured shipowner of his property, they are nonetheless distinct and separate insured perils. Definitions of insured perils must always be approached with caution, and whilst “capture” can be defined quite easily, “seizure”, which can be effected by a number of different persons who are acting for a wide degree of motives, is less easy to describe comprehensively. The following descriptions are helpful. Channell J., when giving judgment in Andersen v. Marten 1 in 1907 quoted from Emerigon when defining “capture”: “A taking by the enemy as prize, in time of open war, or by way of reprisals, with intent to deprive the owner of all dominion or right of property over the thing taken.”

The rest of this document is only available to online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?


Request a trial Find out more