The Apiatse Incident and Insurance Matters Arising
THE APIATSE INCIDENT AND INSURANCE MATTERS ARISING
Introduction
Recently, there was an incident in the Western Region of Ghana, where a vehicle carrying explosives belonging to a mining company got involved in an accident. This caused an explosion, a disaster of massive proportions, leading to numerous unfortunate deaths, injuries, and damages to properties in the Apiatse town.
The incident drew questions from the general public; key among them: whether or not the residents of the town who were affected by the incident would be able to claim insurance compensation for the deaths, resultant injuries, or damages suffered to properties.
Facts and Matters Arising
The first question one would ask is: who is liable to pay for the third party losses that occurred on that day? Is it the mining company or the carrier of the explosives?
The answer to this question would ordinarily be found in the provisions of the contract of carriage.
The answer to the question: ‘who bears liability’ would be clearly provided for in such a contract. And in this particular case, we have been made to believe that the carrier, by contract, is the one who assumes liabilities associated with the carriage of the explosives, and therefore it is they who will bear the ultimate responsibility for third party losses.
The fact remains that a mining company had contracted a carrier to carry explosives, on their behalf, to their mining site. Hence, the carrier in executing this contract had to ensure that they had the requisite insurance policies to cover their operational risks—which includes the carriage of explosives.
From afar, it would be difficult to determine whether or not the carrier had the required insurance policies in place to cover the risks involved in carrying the explosives.
However, considering the nature of work a carrier in this line of business undertakes, one would not be wrong in believing that they had one or more of the under-mentioned insurance covers:
- Motor Insurance
- Goods in Transit Insurance
- Public Liability Insurance
Let us proceed with the assumption that the carrier had the aforementioned insurance policies. If they were adequately covered under these policies, which one of them would rise to indemnify third parties for deaths, injuries, and property damages suffered as a result of this explosion? One by one, let us take a look at these policies, to determine how applicable they are to the Apiatse incident…
Motor Insurance Policy
The standard third party motor insurance policy sold on our Ghanaian insurance market will not respond to third party losses (namely, death, injuries, and property damages suffered by third parties involved in the accident). The accident vehicle’s third party cover would only respond to damages to the motorcycle, and the possible injury or death of the rider. It would not extend to cover death and/or injuries and property damage claims made by third party individuals since the average motor policy would exclude explosions, and damages resulting from such explosive materials.
Goods In Transit Insurance
The standard goods in transit insurance would similarly not respond to third party losses unless a special endorsement has been passed to that effect, giving consideration to the particular nature of the goods being carried and the potential risk involved in its carriage. The only possible claim under this policy would be the loss of the goods (in this particular case, being the explosives). Hence this policy would only provide coverage to, and consequently indemnify only the carrier, and not the residents of the town who have suffered various losses.
Public Liability Insurance
The carrier’s premises-based public liability insurance policy would also not cover third party losses since the location in which the incident happened does not qualify as the carrier’s premises.
General Liability Insurance
The most appropriate insurance policy that would cover these third party losses is a General Liability Policy with an ‘explosives transportation clause’ inserted or endorsed to that effect. The wording of the Explosives Transportation Clause is wide and extensive enough to cover these third party losses should the unexpected happen in the course of the transit. And of course, this would be subject to the limit of liability indicated under such a policy. But ultimately, it is proven that the victims of the Apiatse disaster would find in insurance, relief—so far as insurance (i.e., the right policy) was purchased in the first place.
Conclusion
Insurance is always there, in every situation, to provide us needed relief—provided we engage its services from the very beginning. All we need do is sift through the many options available on the market, for policies that fit our particular needs. And this is a process that can easily prove too tedious for the average layman to undertake. Insurance, like any other economic field, is a specialised one, having its own technicalities and fine lines requiring the guidance of a professional.
Hence, the best way to purchase an insurance policy is to do so through an insurance broker. And what better broker than the one who has, for 30 consecutive years, been the market leader? Wanting the best for yourself, family, and businesses, you must go for the best, and that is KEK Insurance Brokers.
We closely study the nature of your businesses, operations, and situations, and ensure you are provided the appropriate insurances that offer the most optimum of protections.
At KEK, we indeed go the extra mile to provide solutions that secure our clients’ peace of mind!
[By Solomon Boateng. Mr. Boateng is the Assistant General Manager – Technical. He is Chartered Insurance Practitioner and an Associate of the Chartered Insurance Institute, UK (ACII). He has completed a training programme in Oil and Gas insurance organized by Continental Re Ltd. and Oil Spill Management organized in Dubai by Oil Spill Management Ltd, UK.]
