The plaintiffs are Dutch importers of commodities that included industrial leather gloves. Four shipments of gloves were made in 1982 and 1983. The insurance contract contained the following clause:

“This insurance shall in no case be deemed to extend to cover loss damage or expense proximately caused by inherent vice or nature of the subject matter insured.” The plaintiff claimed that the dropping of water from a source external to the goods damaged the gloves. The defendant asserted that the goods deteriorated as a result of their natural behavior. In short, the goods were damaged because the leather was not properly dried by the plaintiff. Is this a case of inherent vice? Noten v. Harding, 2 Lloyd’s Law Report 283 (English Court of Appeal 1990).