ABSTRACT
It is also necessary to appreciate that it is not always possible to divide the insured perils into hard and fast categories. For instance, whilst on one view “seizure” and “detention” could be regarded as having entirely independent and distinct meanings, the authorities have not always treated them as such. Conversely, where the meanings of insured perils do overlap, the language sometimes used in various judgments can blur the strict distinctions which do still exist. Many of the insured perils of the War Risk Policy involve the criminal liability of the perpetrator, and this must be so in any insurance which gives cover against what other people do to the insured object. There is no caselaw considering how the insured perils to be discussed in the following chapters might fall to be applied in the context of cyber warfare or the increasingly prevalent cyber attacks that occur throughout the world.
