Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 AUGUST 2026

War Risk Clauses vs Hindrance Clauses: Same But Different?

When vessels face war risks or operational hindrances, maritime contracts provide different protective mechanisms through VOYWAR/CONWARTIME clauses and bill of lading hindrance provisions. This analysis examines how these contractual tools operate in distinct spheres, bind different parties, and offer varying levels of protection when vessels cannot safely reach their destinations.

SingaporeTransport

Introduction

“War risks” have been the maritime “hot topic” in recent months due to the (repeated) closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This inevitably brings into play a shipowner or carrier’s right to refuse orders, detour, discharge cargo at any safe port and impose surcharges due to war risks.

Many industry panels and client briefings on war risks have mainly focused on two acronyms: VOYWAR and CONWARTIME, BIMCO’s standard war risk clauses for voyage and time charters. In these same discussions, another type of clause is often mentioned in passing or in the same breath (and sometimes treated as interchangeable): the hindrance clause found in the standard terms of a bill of lading.

While all these clauses essentially address the same problem – a vessel unable to safely reach its designated destination – it is important to appreciate that VOYWAR/CONWARTIME and bill of lading hindrance clauses do not wear the same hats.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from