Blockade Clause

What it does

A blockade clause addresses the situation where a port or area on the agreed voyage is subject to a blockade, preventing or endangering the vessel's access. It gives the owner and master rights to respond, typically including refusing to proceed into or through the blockaded area, waiting for the blockade to be lifted, or requiring the charterer to nominate a safe alternative port.

The clause allocates the risks and costs of a blockade between the parties. Because attempting to run or enter a blockade can expose the ship to seizure or attack, it protects the owner from being compelled into that danger and addresses how the resulting delay, diversion, and any additional cost or freight are treated. It is read alongside the war-risks and liberty provisions, within which blockade is often handled.

Commercial effect

The clause assigns the consequences of a blockade, a serious obstruction that can arise from conflict or state action. By allowing the owner to refuse to enter or run a blockade and to seek a safe alternative, it protects the ship and crew, while the treatment of delay, diversion, and cost determines the financial impact and on which party it falls.

Because a blockade is closely related to war and warlike risks, the clause sits within the broader framework for those dangers and is read with the war-risks and liberty clauses. The allocation of delay and diversion cost, and the conditions under which the owner may refuse the blockaded port, make it commercially significant in trades that may be exposed to blockade.

Owner's perspective

The owner wants clear rights to keep the ship out of a blockade, refusing to enter or attempt to run it and seeking a safe alternative, since attempting a blockade can expose the vessel to seizure or attack. It relies on the clause to avoid being compelled by the charterer's voyage orders into that danger, treating the safety of ship and crew as paramount.

The owner also wants the cost consequences allocated fairly, so that delay while awaiting a blockade's lifting and the expense of any diversion are recoverable rather than absorbed by the owner. It negotiates the clause within the war-risks framework so that responding to a blockade protects both the vessel and the owner's financial position.

Charterer's perspective

The charterer accepts that the owner must avoid a genuine blockade but wants the rights exercised on a reasonable basis, so the clause is not used to refuse a port that remains accessible. It is conscious that refusal or diversion can disrupt its cargo and sale plans, so it wants the triggers tied to a real blockade rather than a remote possibility.

The charterer also focuses on the cost and delay allocation, wanting these to be reasonable and clear, particularly where the risk was foreseeable when the voyage was fixed. It negotiates the blockade clause alongside the war-risks and liberty provisions so that the response to a blockade is balanced against its need to perform the voyage on workable terms.

Negotiation points

• The owner's rights when a port or area is blockaded — refuse, wait, or seek a safe alternative.
• The threshold of blockade severity for exercising those rights.
• Who bears the cost of delay, diversion, and any additional freight.
• The interaction with the war-risks and liberty provisions.

Common variations

• A clause allowing the owner to refuse a blockaded port and seek a safe alternative.
• A blockade provision handled within a broader war risks clause.
• A clause addressing delay while awaiting the lifting of a blockade.
• A provision for additional freight on diversion away from a blockaded port.