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.
|
|
Saturday, 30 November 13
NTPC STARTED IMPORTING COAL THROUGH NW1 FOR ITS FARAKKA POWER PLANT
COALspot.com: In a pioneering and path breaking operation, the very first consignment of about 69,060 metric tons of imported coal bought by MV HUAY ...
Friday, 29 November 13
DRY BULK MARKET BACK ON HIGHER GROUND - NIKOS ROUSSANOGLOU, HELLENIC SHIPPING NEWS
The dry bulk market is strengthening as a result of higher demand for Capesize vessels. The BDI (Baltic Dry Index) was up by 146 points yesterday, e ...
Wednesday, 27 November 13
DRY SEGMENTS EXCEPTION OF PANAMAXES, REMAINED OVERALL STABLE - INTERMODAL
COALspot.com : The Dry Bulk market closed off the week in the red, albeit the decrease noted was of short scale. With the exception of Panamaxes, th ...
Wednesday, 27 November 13
US WHEAT IMPORTS TO BRAZIL, REACHED A 35 - YEAR HIGH - EVA TZIMA
COALspot.com: As I am going through a number of dry market fixtures reported since the beginning of October, my eyes instinctively stop where they d ...
Wednesday, 27 November 13
SHIP OWNERS ONCE AGAIN TURN TO DRY BULK CARRIERS - NIKOS ROUSSANOGLOU, HELLENIC SHIPPING
Ship owners once again turned to more dry bulk carrier ordering over the course of the past week, as more and more appear convinced of the industry ...
|
|
|
Showing 3986 to 3990 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Planning Commission, India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- White Energy Company Limited
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- The University of Queensland
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
