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, 12 March 14
DRY BULK VESSELS STILL THE CREAM OF THE CROP FOR SHIP OWNERS
Dry bulk carriers have remained the most popular vessel type among ship owners as proven by the sheer number of second hand vessel sales and new ...
Tuesday, 11 March 14
NEWCASTLE SHIPPED 6.98% LESS COAL WEEK ON WEEK
COALspot.com: In the week ended 10 March 2014, power plant and semi-soft coking coal shipments from the port of Newcastle in Queensland, total 2 ...
Tuesday, 11 March 14
INDONESIAN SUB-BITUMINOUS COAL SWAPS CONTINUES TO FALL
COALspot.com – Indonesia, the world’s largest exporter of the thermal coal's swaps for delivery April - June 2014 slip again thi ...
Monday, 10 March 14
API 8 CFR SOUTH CHINA COAL SWAPS LOST 4.28 PERCENT MONTH ON MONTH FOR Q2 DELIVERY
COALspot.com: API 8 CFR South China Coal swaps for average Q2 14 deliveries lost 4.28 percent month on month and closed at US$ 73.97 per mt as on Fr ...
Monday, 10 March 14
THE FREIGHT MARKET WAS QUITE FIRM THIS PAST WEEK
COALspot.com: The freight market was quite firm this past week with BDI sharply increased by 22.65 pct week on week and closed at 1543 points, while ...
|
|
|
Showing 3806 to 3810 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Minerals Council of Australia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Australian Coal Association
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- PTC India Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Planning Commission, India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- White Energy Company Limited
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- The University of Queensland
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
|
| |
| |
|
