Practitioners in the field of marine insurance will be familiar with the first edition of this text, published in 2004. It won the 2005 British Law Insurance Association Book Prize. The second edition, which came out in mid-2012, has, in my view, achieved the difficult task of surpassing the first edition in terms of scholarship and analytical discussion. It is also notable for a wide coverage of relevant authorities. It will become indispensable to lawyers, academicians and other persons interested in marine insurance, not only in the United Kingdom but throughout the common law world. In producing the second edition, Professor FD Rose has been assisted by Professor Gerard McMeel and Dr Stephen Watterson.

Like the first, the second edition is a comprehensive examination of all areas of law pertinent to marine insurance. It has a broad geographical coverage as well, covering cases from all over the Commonwealth, including my own jurisdiction, and also some cases from the United States and civil law systems. The law stated in the text is up to date as of 31 December 2011 and, as a result, the text is able to cover the revised and updated standard Institute Cargo Clauses.

All areas of law and practice relevant to marine insurance are discussed. Starting out with a discussion of the nature of insurance itself, the text moves on to deal with such essential topics as the subject matter of insurance and the nature of the insurable interest. There is a very useful chapter on the role of intermediaries in the marine insurance business and the relationship between underwriters. Whilst there are many texts on agency, the interesting discussion here is how an undisclosed agency relationship plays out in practice. Professor Rose identifies the common tendency of insurers to deal with brokers and not to enquire as to the identity of their unnamed principals, and discusses the problems that may arise from such practice. Whilst in some cases unnamed parties may subsequently be able to persuade the court that they were intended assureds, in others failure of identification may prove fatal. The example cited of the The Jascon 5 [2006] 2 Ll L Rep 195 is interesting as showing that, even where it may have been expected that a particular party should be covered by the policy because of the nature of the risk and the relationship of that insured to the risk, if the broker fails to name the party when effecting the policy, the court may find that that party was not covered because its inclusion as a co-insured could have had a significant effect on the insurer’s rights of subrogation.

The meat of marine insurance is covered exhaustively. In relation to the formation of the contract, the concept of utmost good faith and the related topic of non-disclosure are discussed in detail both in relation to the relevant sections of the Marine Insurance Act 1906 and the case authority thereon. The non-marine case of Pan Atlantic Ins Co Ltd v Pine Top Ins Co Ltd [1995] 1 AC 501, as the leading modern authority on non-disclosure, is dealt with in considerable and useful detail, especially with regard to the differing tests applied to s.18 of the Marine Insurance Act 1906 by the House of Lords and the Court of Appeal. Further, the section on “Post-contractual duties of good