This paper examines marine insurance issues arising from the scuttling or deliberate casting away of a ship with the connivance of the insured shipowner. Currently, where the loss is attributable to the wilful misconduct of the shipowner, not only the shipowner, but also the mortgagee of the vessel, and the cargo owner whose cargo sank together with the ship, will be barred from recovery. The paper examines the purpose of s 55(2)(a) of the Marine Insurance Act 1906 (UK) and the controversial decision of the majority in Samuel v Dumas. The author argues that this decision should be revisited in order to produce a more just ruling for the co-assured innocent mortgagee.