We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining,
shipping, etc.
To Submit your article please click here.
|
|
|
Monday, 01 April 19
FORCE MAJEURE SUCCESS NOT A SEA CHANGE - BALTIC EXCHANGE
 KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
It is difficult to successfully argue that contractual performance has been prevented or delayed by force majeure. This is in part because English courts or arbitration tribunals will interpret these clauses strictly and narrowly against the party seeking to rely on them.
Recent decisions, including Triple Point Technology v PTT (2017) and Seadrill Ghana v Tullow Ghana (2018), are evidence of this approach. However, Sucden Middle-East, represented by Nick Fisher of HFW, has recently relied successfully on such a clause in the Commercial Court, on appeal from arbitration.
The case, Sucden Middle-East v Yagci Denizcilik Ve Ticaret Limited Sirketi, “The Mv Muammer Yagci”, involved a shipment of sugar to Algeria on the Sugar Charter Party 1999 form. The facts found by the arbitral tribunal were that when the cargo arrived in Algeria, the cargo-receivers submitted false import documents to local customs authorities. The local customs responded by seizing the cargo, using powers under customs laws and regulations.
A delay to discharging the cargo of four and a half months ensued. Sucden, as charterers, claimed this delay fell within the exceptions to laytime running under clause 28. Owners disagreed. At first instance, the arbitral tribunal agreed with owners.
Charterers appealed to the Commercial Court. Permission to bring the appeal was given on the basis that the question of law was one of general public importance, as it related to a standard form contract in wide commercial usage.
The judgement
The question before the Commercial Court was: “Where a cargo is seized by the local customs authorities at the discharge port causing a delay to discharge, is the time so lost caused by ‘government interferences’ within the meaning of clause 28 of the Sugar Charter Party 1999 form?” Clause 28 reads:
“Strikes and Force Majeure
In the event that whilst at or off the loading place or discharging place the loading and/or discharging of the vessel is prevented or delayed by any of the following occurrences: strikes, riots, civil commotions, lockouts of men, accidents and/or breakdowns on railways, stoppages on railway and/or river and/or canal by ice or frost, mechanical breakdowns at mechanical loading plants, government interferences, vessel being inoperative or rendered inoperative due to terms and conditions of employment of the Officers and Crew, time so lost shall not count as laytime on demurrage or detention…”
In deciding whether a force majeure event had occurred, the Court focused on the construction of “government interferences”. It was fairly straightforward to establish that a government entity acting in a sovereign capacity was involved, but owners argued that the government being involved was not enough and that there had to be “interferences”. In reaching its decision that there had been no interference, the tribunal had considered it a key point that seizure was an “ordinary” action. The Court rejected this conclusion. It held that the seizure of the cargo was not routine and did fall within the meaning of “interferences”. Seizure is a significant exercise of executive power and therefore could not be regarded as “ordinary”. Suspected or predictable consequences are not the same as ordinary actions (such as the inspection of the cargo by a government surveyor): “In the usual course of things, cargo is not seized and property rights are not invaded in that way.” The very fact that false documents were involved showed that the circumstances were not routine.
The Court emphasised that it was of “real importance” that its conclusion on the language was not difficult to apply, nor did it in any way offend commercial common sense.
The owners’ causation argument was also dismissed, as it was held that the seizure caused the delay, even if the submission of false documents caused the seizure.
Further detail
In allowing the appeal, the Court still maintained the strict and narrow approach to force majeure, stressing that “the answer given to the question is only a narrow ‘yes’. It is ‘yes’ where the circumstances are as in the present case. The answer does not address all of the circumstances that may come within or fall outside clause 28. The answer is concerned only with the seizure of a cargo and with that seizure by a customs authority that is a State revenue authority acting in a sovereign capacity”.
This judgment gives some welcome publicly-available guidance on the interpretation of a force majeure clause in a standard form widely used in sugar trading. While the charterers were successfully able to rely on the force majeure clause in this case, it does not signal a change in the strict and narrow approach typically adopted by the English courts.
Source: Baltic Exchange
If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.
|
|
Friday, 06 September 24
REBOUND IN OIL DEMAND COULD LIFT MARKET IN LATTER HALF OF 2024 - BIMCO
Supply/demand
Based on a strong second half demand, the supply/balance is forecast to strengthen in 2024 but weaken slightly in 2025 as n ...
Friday, 06 September 24
GLOBAL SEABORNE LNG TRADE HAS CONTINUED TO INCREASE LAST YEAR - BANCHERO COSTA
Global seaborne LNG trade has continued to increase last year, helped also by the events in Ukraine which forced Europe to diversify away from Russ ...
Wednesday, 28 August 24
SEABORNE COAL IMPORTS INTO INDIA INCREASED BY +9.9% Y-O-Y TO 146.6 MLN T - BANCHERO COSTA
Global coal trade has really picked up pace over the past year, and is now fully back to pre-Covid levels said Banchero Costa Research in its lates ...
Tuesday, 06 August 24
EXERCISE CAUTION WITH AMMONIA SWITCH - BALTIC EXCHANGE
A new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has thrown a spanner into the plan to transition ships from diesel fuel to ammonia ...
Friday, 02 August 24
ENERGY MARKET DEVELOPMENTS: COAL AND NATURAL GAS PRICES REACH RECORD HIGHS - WORLD BANK
The recent surge in natural gas and coal prices has been so swift that the main benchmarks were roughly three times higher in 2022Q2 compared to a ...
|
|
|
Showing 1 to 5 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Australian Coal Association
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- PTC India Limited - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- White Energy Company Limited
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
1 