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, 09 December 13
SUB-BIT INDONESIA COAL SWAP FOR Q3' 14 DELIVERY CLOSED $ 0.57 LESSER THAN Q1 CLOSING
COALspot.com – Sub-Bit Indonesia coal swap (FOB ) for average Q1’ 14 delivery gained $ 1.49 pmt month on month on Friday 6 Decembe ...
Sunday, 08 December 13
SOUTH CHINA COAL SWAPS SHOW A DECLINE TREND IN Q2 & Q3' 14
COALspot.com : API 8 CFR South China Coal swaps for average Q1’ 14 delivery gained 6.76 percept month on month as on Friday 6 December 2013. T ...
Sunday, 08 December 13
RBCT SHIPPED 63.446 MMT OF COALS YTD
COALspot.com - Richards Bay Coal Terminal (RBCT), the world's single largest coal terminal has shipped 63,446,232 mt of coals YTD, according to por ...
Saturday, 07 December 13
SUPRAMAX SHIPS FOR EC INDIA TO CHINA ROUTE BEING FIXED AT AROUND US$ 13K - SOLYM
COALspot.com: The freight market continued to be firm due to high Iron ore demand. The cape index was up by almost 25 pct this week. The grain seaso ...
Saturday, 07 December 13
A RARE TIME IN RECENT SHIPPING MARKET HISTORY: BOTH DRY BULK AND VLCC TANKER EARNINGS ARE ON THE RISE - NIKOS ROUSSANOGLOU, HELLENIC SHIPPING NEWS
Around this time of year, back in 2008, i.e. five years ago, the shipping markets were plagued with the aftermath of the global financial crisis tha ...
|
|
|
Showing 3966 to 3970 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Australian Coal Association
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- White Energy Company Limited
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
