Disputes
The UK High Court has rejected approximately $340 million in claims brought by Chubb European Group and Fidelis Insurance Ireland against war-risk underwriters, dealing a significant setback in the ongoing wave of insurance litigation arising from aircraft stranded in Russia following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Chubb and Fidelis had previously paid claims to aircraft lessors — including AerCap and Merx Aviation Finance — under contingent war-risk policies, after their aircraft became effectively unrecoverable following Russian measures that prevented the return of foreign-owned aircraft. The insurers argued that, having paid out under their own policies after war-risk underwriters allegedly failed to do so, they were entitled to reimbursement through indemnity or contribution from those underwriters. The High Court rejected these reimbursement claims. The ruling follows a landmark 2025 High Court judgment that determined the losses fell under war-risk coverage — that earlier decision was what enabled lessors to pursue billions of dollars in insurance claims in the first instance. The latest judgment narrows the contribution and indemnity routes available to contingent-cover insurers seeking to recover against war-risk underwriters, with major implications for the ongoing, multi-billion dollar wave of Russia aviation insurance litigation seated in the English courts.
Why this matters
This High Court ruling adds a further layer of complexity to the Russia aviation insurance litigation — one of the largest and most legally intricate insurance disputes in English legal history. By rejecting the contribution and indemnity claims brought by contingent-cover insurers, the court narrows the recovery routes available to insurers who paid out on the basis that war-risk underwriters had failed to do so. This will have direct implications for how remaining claims in the Russian aviation portfolio are structured and litigated. The decision activates insurance law, commercial litigation, and aviation finance expertise simultaneously, and will likely prompt appeal proceedings. For practitioners, the key legal questions concern the scope of contribution rights between co-insurers and the sequencing of liability across layered insurance programmes.
On the Ground
A trainee on this matter would assist with disclosure review and categorisation across the voluminous insurance policy documentation, help prepare a chronology of the payment and demand sequence between the insurers and underwriters, and assist with court filing and service of any further pleadings or appeal documentation.
Interview prep
Question you might get
“In a layered insurance programme, what is the legal basis for a contribution claim between co-insurers, and what arguments might a war-risk underwriter raise to resist such a claim?”
Sign up free to see the full answer
A model answer you can lift into an interview — how to frame this story for a partner.
Sign up freeMy notes
saved