OMAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Abdulredha Al Lawati, Zainab Al Lawati, Daniyal Khalid and Aoun Al Zadjali, ALC Lawyers & Counsel
arbitrators, subject to the mandatory provisions of the applicable law. Confidentiality and privacy may also form important features of the arbitral process, par- ticularly in complex commercial insurance disputes involving commercially sensitive information. As regards challenges to arbitral awards, Omani law does not generally permit an appeal against an arbi- tral award on the merits in the same manner as an ordinary court judgment. Instead, recourse against an award is principally available through an action for nullification on the limited grounds prescribed by the Law of Arbitration in Civil and Commercial Disputes. Those grounds concern matters such as the validity and scope of the arbitration agreement, procedural irregularities, the constitution or jurisdiction of the tribunal, and matters of public policy or arbitrability, rather than a general reconsideration of the tribunal’s factual or legal conclusions. Accordingly, while arbitration remains less prevalent in standard insurance disputes in Oman, it is a viable and increasingly relevant mechanism for sophisticated, high-value, and project-specific insurance disputes. Its availability ultimately depends on the nature of the insurance arrangement, how the arbitration agree- ment was incorporated, and the parties bound by it. 4. Coverage Disputes 4.1 Evolving Trends in Coverage Disputes Marine and Cargo Coverage Marine and cargo insurance has become a more sig- nificant area of coverage analysis in Oman. The dis- putes encountered in practice are not limited to war- risk issues and increasingly concern the nature and timing of damage, the stage of transit, the period of cover, post-arrival storage and the potential applica- tion of more than one policy. For straightforward transit damage, the principal issues are factual: when and where the damage occurred, whether the goods remained within insured transit, the immediate cause, custody at the time of loss and the extent of physical damage. Transport documents, police reports, photographs, custody records and early surveys can therefore be decisive.
Project cargo creates more difficult questions where equipment has completed sea transit but remains stored before installation or commissioning. A dispute may concern whether there was insured physical dam- age at all, when it occurred and whether the marine policy, construction policy or neither responds. In one substantial project matter, the same alleged damage was advanced under Marine Cargo and Contrac- tors’ All Risks policies. The issues included whether there had been sudden accidental damage or gradual deterioration following prolonged storage, whether atmospheric conditions and lack of use engaged exclusions, whether the claimant had an enforceable right to indemnity, and whether an overlap provision between the policies was engaged. The marine claim also raised a separate statutory time-bar issue. These questions are particularly relevant to major con- struction, energy and infrastructure projects because imported equipment may pass through sea transit, discharge, temporary storage, inland movement, pro- ject-site storage and eventual installation. The point at which one cover terminates and another begins can therefore be as important as the substantive exclusion relied upon. Regional Disruption Regional shipping disruption during 2026 has added further issues involving rerouting, detention, port con- gestion, extended storage, increased freight costs, deterioration during delay and project disruption. Many such losses are economic rather than physical, so the analysis frequently turns on the causal chain, the policy trigger, delay and deterioration exclusions and any war, territorial or sanctions provisions. Diversion can also increase accumulation at ports, warehouses or project sites and engage storage or location sub-limits. Insurers are consequently scru- tinising transit termination, storage, preservation, war-risk provisions and evidence of cargo condition more closely. Insureds are correspondingly examin- ing extensions and overlapping policies to avoid gaps between sea transit, storage, inland movement and installation. The central question is increasingly which policy responds, at which stage, to which event and subject to which exclusion, limit or sub-limit.
207 I NSURANCE L I T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook