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, 03 February 14
API 8 CFR SOUTH CHINA COAL SWAP CONTRACTS FALL
COALspot.com: API 8 CFR South China Coal swaps for average Q1 14 delivery lost 4.71 percent month on month and closed at US$ 78.87 per mt as on Frid ...
Monday, 03 February 14
COAL FREIGHT RATES REMAIN UNDER PRESSURE
COALspot.com: The BDI is fell 50 pct over last one month which seems to be one of the lowest fall in last few years.
The BDI was down by 11 ...
Friday, 31 January 14
U.S. COAL PRODUCTION TOTALED APPROXIMATELY 19.2 MMST W-O-W
COALspot.com – United States the world’s second largest coal producer, produced approximately 19.2 million short tons (mmst) of coal in ...
Friday, 31 January 14
DRY BULK MARKET STILL ON A FALL, EXPECTED TO WORSEN - NIKOS ROUSSANOGLOU, HELLENIC SHIPPING NEWS
The dry bulk market is definitely in the doldrums since the start of the year, in what could only be described as a "lost" month for indus ...
Thursday, 30 January 14
JPU SETTLEMENT PRICE AS A BENCHMARK WILL DECLINE IN IMPORTANCE BUT REMAIN RELEVANT, SAYS WOOD MACKENZIE
JPU price will remain above spot, trending closer to spot till 2015 then increasing to 2035.
Japanese Power Utilities (JPU) are approaching a cru ...
|
|
|
Showing 3871 to 3875 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- The University of Queensland
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
|
| |
| |
|
