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.
|
|
Thursday, 20 February 14
SUPRAMAX: IN ASIA IS IMPROVING SIGNIFICANTLY AND TURNED FROM APS TO DOP MARKET
Handy
The activity is back in the market after Chinese holidays. Supramax in Asia is improving significantly and turned from APS to DOP market. We ...
Wednesday, 19 February 14
NEWCASTLE PORT SHIPPED 30% MORE COAL WEEK ON WEEK
COALspot.com: In the week ended 17 February 2014, power plant and semi-soft coking coal shipments from the port of Newcastle in Queensland, totalled ...
Tuesday, 18 February 14
PERUVIAN HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR MINING AFFAIRS WILL BE KEY NOTE SPEAKER AT THE COLOMBIAN COAL CONFERENCE 2014
Press Release: The High Commissioner for Mining Affairs in the Presidency of the Peruvian Council of Ministers, General (R) Daniel Urresti Elera, ha ...
Monday, 17 February 14
US COAL PRODUCTION IN 2013 FELL TO ITS LOWEST LEVEL IN 20 YEARS
COALspot.com: U.S coal production for 2013 totaled an estimated 996 million short tons (MMst), 21 MMst (2%) lower than in 2012. It is the first time ...
Monday, 17 February 14
Q1 2015 COAL SWAPS CLOSED $ 2.21 HIGHER THAN Q2 2014 SWAPS
COALspot.com: API 8 CFR South China Coal swaps for average Q2 14 delivery lost 3.16 percent month on month and closed at US$ 76.12 per mt as o ...
|
|
|
Showing 3846 to 3850 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- The University of Queensland
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- PTC India Limited - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
|
| |
| |
|
