Colleagues Joseph Jean and Meaghan Murphy recently authored a four-part series examining the myriad insurance considerations brought to the forefront by recent and ongoing events in Iran.
Part I – When Chokepoints Become Chokeholds
When trade routes detour, ports slow and sanctions tighten, the difference between a painful delay and an uninsured loss often comes down to a few lines of policy wording.
Part II – Business Interruption vs. the Supply Chain
Many BI and contingent BI disputes don’t turn on the headline event. They turn on the trigger: What, exactly, counts as a covered loss at a covered location caused by a covered peril.
Part III – Political Risk, Political Violence and the Sanctions Tripwire
Some losses don’t look like “property damage” at all. They look like government action, loss of control, blocked payments or a legal inability to perform. That’s where PRI/political violence wording—and sanctions clauses—do the heavy lifting.
Part IV – War Risks, Detention and the Courts
War-risk losses are rarely “mysteries.” They’re usually fights about ordinary words—“detainment,” “loss,” “costs,” “restraint,” “constructive total loss”—and about which section of a program pays when war is in the causal chain.
Pillsbury is helping clients navigate the shifting geopolitical, regulatory and economic landscape in Iran with informed insight and global perspective. Our experienced team of legal specialists, policy analysts, and former U.S. and UK government officials are actively monitoring the situation and providing integrated risk and response advice in connection with the immediate and long-term impacts of developments in the region.