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 May 14
SHIPPING: MARKET INSIGHT - GEORGE LAZARIDIS
The recent revision by the OECD of its global growth forecast has sparked a debate as to the potential outcome these new figures will have on seabo ...
Tuesday, 20 May 14
NEWCASTLE'S COAL EXPORT VOLUME UP 39.11 PERCENT WEEK ON WEEK
COALspot.com: In the week ended 07:00 hours 19 May 2014, power plant and semi-soft coking coal shipments from the port of Newcastle in Queensland, ...
Tuesday, 20 May 14
DRY BULK MARKET TO IMPROVE OVER THE COURSE OF 2014, BUT OVERSUPPLY STILL AN ISSUE SAYS BIMCO'S CHIEF SHIPPING ANALYST
As a gruelling first quarter edges closer to the end, dry bulk ship owners are looking at an improved second quarter demand, which, coupled with sl ...
Tuesday, 20 May 14
DRY BULK MARKET IS BOUND FOR A RECOVERY CLAIMS PARAGON SHIPPING'S HEAD MICHAEL BODOUROGLOU
The dry bulk market is bound for a recovery in the coming weeks, as the market will be better balanced, said Mr. Michael Bodouroglou, Chairman and ...
Monday, 19 May 14
INDO COAL SWAPS FOR AVERAGE Q3' 2014 DELIVERY LOST ON WEEK AND ON MONTH
COALspot.com: Indonesian coal swaps for average Q3’ 2014 lost on week and on month according to AsiaClear OTC coal swap's reports release ...
|
|
|
Showing 3696 to 3700 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Planning Commission, India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
