BREAKING: New Nord Stream Revelations!

The Nord Stream insurers' refusal to pony up for damages to the sabotaged pipeline is based on dubious legal grounds, according to an international law scholar.

Source: reuters.com

*This article originally appeared in CovertAction Magazine. It can be read in full for free by opening this link.

*La versión en inglés de este artículo originalmente se publicó en CovertAction Magazine, la de en español en Diario16. Se puede leer gratis en español en este enlace.

Lloyd’s of London and Bermuda-based Arch Insurance deny the €400 million claim by Nord Stream AG, arguing their policies do not provide coverage for the 2022 underwater explosions that ruptured the natural gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea because the damage was inflicted by “a government.”

But “the defendants’ argument is prima facie irrelevant,” says an expert in law of the sea. 

Nord Stream AG last month brought a €400 million lawsuit against Lloyd’s of London and Arch Insurance in the High Court for refusing to pay an indemnity for the subsea blasts that ripped apart the Nord Stream 1 pipeline that carried natural gas from Russia to Germany along the floor of the Baltic Sea.

The written defense to the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Lloyd’s of London and Bermuda-based Arch Insurance, was made public last week by Swedish engineer Erik Andersson, who led the only private investigative expedition (in which I participated) to all four blast sites of the Nord Stream pipelines. It states that the “Defendants will rely on, inter alia, the fact that the Explosion Damage could only have (or, at least, was more likely than not to have) been inflicted by or under the order of a government.”

Full article in English here.

Artículo completo en español aquí.