We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining,
shipping, etc.
To Submit your article please click here.
|
|
|
Tuesday, 11 March 14
HOLD HARMLESS CLAUSES ARE NOT ALWAYS MUTUAL! - ITIC
 KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
ITIC provides an insurance related contract review service to all of its members. As the leading professional indemnity insurer for the offshore and hydrographic sector, we are often asked to review contracts which contain a mutual hold harmless or knock for knock clause. We are usually told that the presence of this clause in a contract means the risk of a claim is either significantly reduced or even non-existent! No contract is completely risk free. However, if the clause is worded carefully, and is balanced between both contracting parties, it is good contractual risk management and can help to reduce the chance of a successful claim of negligence against you.
A mutual hold harmless indemnity regime provides that each party to the contract agrees to take responsibility for, and to indemnify the other, against injury and loss to its own personnel and property and its own ‘consequential losses’. This is intended to be effective even if the accident and related losses are caused by negligence.
The mutual hold harmless clause in the LOGIC standard form contracts, does seek to create balance. However, in many of the contracts we review, the party with the greater bargaining power will naturally seek to swing the balance back to their favour. Consequently, there are a number of pitfalls to consider. We shall provide a few of these below. This shall be viewed from an English law and a professional indemnity insurance perspective.
Insurance
First, when asked to review contracts with a mutual hold harmless clause, ITIC would suggest that your other insurers are notified. Potentially you are signing away the recovery rights of both your property and employers’ liability insurer. Therefore, you should seek authority from them before signing a contract containing a mutual hold harmless clause.
They may not be mutual
It is staggering how often we see contracts where “the consultant shall indemnify the company against any and all losses,” but there is no reciprocal benefit to the consultant. Furthermore, the clause can be more beneficial to one party, as one side may be carrying out all of the work, using only their employees and property. The clause should be read carefully to ensure there is a mutual provision.
Third party damage
The mutual hold harmless clauses seen by ITIC, although setting out the losses suffered to the property or employees of the contracting parties, will often leave the distribution of third party liabilities unclear. If, for example, you act as a hydrographic consultant on a survey vessel, you should be protected from third party claims arising from the operation of the vessel. The consultant should not be responsible for potentially multi-million dollar pollution liabilities, or collision damages to third party property. These should fall upon the party who has insurance for these liabilities, such as the vessel’s protection and indemnity or hull and machinery cover.
Gross Negligence
The hold harmless regime provides that neither party shall be liable to the other even where the loss occurred is due to the negligence of one party. However, in some cases we see the clause is amended to state this does not apply in instances of “gross” negligence. Therefore, if one of the parties is found to be grossly negligent they will not be held harmless. This might be fine if the contract was pursuant to Norwegian or US law.
Unfortunately, there is no true concept of gross negligence under English law. You should always operate under the assumption that you are negligent or you are not. Baron Rolfe, in - Wilson v Brett (1843) - stated that he “could see no difference between negligence and gross negligence; that it was the same thing, with the addition of a vituperative epithet.” In other words “gross” did not add anything to the standard negligence test. That being said, if gross negligence is included in a contract, a tribunal will attempt to interpret it. The leading decision comes from Lord Mance in - The Hellespont Ardent (1997) – in which he found that gross negligence: is “conduct so seriously negligent that the defendant should not be entitled to rely on the exemption clause.” He further added that it is “very much a matter of degree and judgment,” and, “all the circumstances must be weighed and balanced.” It should be pointed out that Lord Mance was interpreting a contract pursuant to New York law. Therefore, his words are not binding, and his interpretation on gross negligence may not be followed by subsequent tribunals.
The line between negligence and gross negligence can become blurred, and cases will turn on the facts and expert evidence. Moreover, tribunals may have differing opinions on how to apply the test against the facts, reaching differing decisions. On balance, the inclusion of gross negligence within a hold harmless clause in a contract pursuant to English law can lead to uncertainty and increased litigation costs.
Finally, it is understandable that contracting parties do not want the other to rely on a hold harmless clause, as a shield for reprehensible behaviour, beyond the ordinary test of negligence. However, as the line is blurred between that of negligence and gross negligence, a more delineated position to take, is between that of wilful default/misconduct and negligence.
Indirect damages
A further and final point we see, is how consequential or indirect losses are defined in the mutual hold harmless clause. It is usual that these losses are excluded under contract. However, the distinction between indirect and direct loss can be complicated. The famous case of Hadley v Baxendale [1854] found that direct losses were those which arise naturally from the breach of contract, and is therefore foreseeable and recoverable. Whereas, indirect losses were recoverable, but only if they were reasonably foreseeable by both parties, as a possible result of a breach, at the time of contracting.
A common misconception is that all “loss of profits” are indirect losses. This is wrong. Loss of profits can be either direct or indirect, depending on the facts of the case. The following is taken from the hold harmless clause of a contract we have reviewed recently:
“ The consultant nor the company shall be liable to the other… for any consequential indirect damage, that may be suffered by the other.”
This clause could pose problems in the event of a claim, as it only excludes “consequential indirect damages.” Following Hadley v Baxendale, dependant on the facts, loss of profit can either be a direct or indirect result of the breach. If, for example, a consultant was providing design work for sub-sea equipment and carried out the design negligently, not only could this cause damage to property, but also lost drilling time, leading to lost revenue and profit. In this example, a tribunal could find the loss of profit arose naturally from the breach, and therefore, is a direct loss not excluded under the above hold harmless clause. Taking into account the current day rates of drill rigs, this could form a substantial part of any claim.
The clause should be amended to state loss of profits are excluded, whether direct or indirect.
Conclusion
ITIC’s advice is that you carefully review your hold harmless clauses to ensure that they are actually mutual and of benefit to you.
Source: ITIC / Hellenic Shipping
If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.
|
|
Monday, 08 January 24
KOSPO TO BUY 80000 MT OF INDONESIAN LOW CALORIFIC VALUE COAL FOR FEB 2024
Korea Southern Power Co., Ltd. (KOSPO), is inviting bids for the supply of Indonesian Low Calorific Value Coal from qualified suppliers for Korean ...
Monday, 08 January 24
SEABORNE TRADE REACHES 12.4BN TONNES - CLARKSONS
China will establish a back-up coal production system by 2027 to stabilise prices and secure coal supply, the state planner said on Wednesday, even ...
Monday, 08 January 24
CAPESIZES START THE NEW YEAR ON POSITIVE NOTE - BALTIC EXCHANGE
Capesize
This week the capsize market has been marked by a mix of activities and challenges. Despite a slow start following the Christmas and N ...
Friday, 05 January 24
MORGAN STANLEY SEES LOWER OIL PRICES IN 2024 ON OVERSUPPLY CONCERNS - REUTERS
Morgan Stanley sees Brent crude prices anchored near $80 per barrel in the first half in 2024 before declining towards the end of the year as it ex ...
Friday, 05 January 24
INDIA'S COAL OUTPUT RISES NEARLY 11 PC IN DEC TO 92.87 MT - PTI
India’s coal production increased by 10.75 per cent to 92.87 million tonne in December 2023 as compared to the year-ago period, an official s ...
|
|
|
Showing 56 to 60 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Australian Coal Association
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Economic Council, Georgia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- The University of Queensland
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- PTC India Limited - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Planning Commission, India
|
| |
| |
|
