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.
|
|
Wednesday, 21 June 23
CHINA'S MAY COAL IMPORTS FROM AUSTRALIA RECOVER TO PRE-BAN LEVELS - REUTERS
Australian coal sales to China increased in May, as trade resumed between them even as overall coal demand weakened against an uncertain macroecono ...
Monday, 19 June 23
DROUGHT-DEPLETED HYDROPOWER DRIVES CHINA TO TURN TO COAL - REUTERS
China has leant hard on coal-fired power plants as well as wind and solar generators to make up for a shortfall in hydroelectric generation as a re ...
Monday, 19 June 23
CHINA COAL OUTPUT UP 4.2 PCT IN MAY - XINHUA
China’s raw coal output posted steady growth in May, official data showed.
The country produced 390 million tonnes of raw coal ...
Wednesday, 24 May 23
AMMONIA-FUELLED BULK CARRIERS WITHIN FIVE YEARS - BALTIC EXCHANGE
Within five years, ships powered by clean ammonia could be a feature on the iron ore trade routes between West Australia and East Asia.
A study ...
Tuesday, 23 May 23
CHINA'S APRIL COAL OUTPUT LEAPS 11% ON YEAR, BUT DEMAND DOWNTURN LOOMS - REUTERS
China’s daily coal output in April jumped 11% from the same month a year earlier, boosted by Beijing’s order to increase supply to ensu ...
|
|
|
Showing 96 to 100 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- VISA Power Limited - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Australian Coal Association
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
