An Australian who travelled to Iran despite a long-standing government warning has lost a claim dispute after her return flight was cancelled. 

A Smartraveller advisory for Iran had existed for a significant amount of time prior to her travel. 

The website said "do not travel to Iran due to the volatile security situation, armed conflict, civil unrest and the risk of arbitrary detention".  

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority says Allianz subsidiary AWP Australia was not liable for additional expenses incurred after her return flight to Australia was cancelled in July last year, due to airspace closure and the security situation. 

"The insurer applied a clear policy exclusion," the ombudsman said. "I acknowledge the complainant says the events were extraordinary and outside her control. However, the policy does not cover the claimed expenses in these circumstances. 

"The loss occurred because the complainant travelled to a country with a long-standing ‘Do not travel’ warning, and the reasons for the warning caused the flight cancellation." 

The traveller, who lodged a claim under a credit card complimentary travel insurance policy, had been due to depart Iran on July 2. She says the cause of her loss was unexpected flight cancellation and airspace disruption, rather than her decision to travel. 

But the AWS wording stated the policy did not cover claims "arising because you did not follow an advice or warning that a reasonable person would have been aware of by an Australian government, which can be found on smartraveller.gov.au." 

AFCA says the claimed expenses arose from her not following this warning, and was therefore excluded. 

The airline cited operational reasons relating to Iran closing part of its airspace and the generally escalating security situation in the area at the time. 

 "I am satisfied the partial airspace closure and the escalating security situation in, and around, Iran caused the cancellation of the complainant’s flight," the ruling says.  

"I acknowledge the complainant says commercial flights continued operating and the advisory alone should not automatically exclude every later unforeseen travel disruption, regardless of its actual cause. However, I am not satisfied this changes the outcome.

"The Smartraveller ‘Do not travel’ warning existed because of the security situation in, and around, Iran. Iran’s partial airspace closure and escalating security situation caused the cancellation of the complainant’s flight." 

AFCA says the claimed loss and expenses arose from not following advice or a warning from the Australian government, and the "fact commercial airlines had been operating prior to the flight cancellation does not change this". 

See the ruling here.