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, 27 August 21
THE ECONOMICS OF INDONESIA’S DIESEL POWER PLANT TO GAS CONVERSION PLAN ARE PROBLEMATIC - IEEFA
Deploying new small-scale LNG is an uphill battle for PGN
Indonesian gas is currently in a precarious position, where the government needs to ...
Thursday, 26 August 21
INDIA IMPORTED 17.06 MLN TONNES OF LPG IN 2020; UP 11.5% Y-O-Y
Global LPG trade remained fairly positive in 2020, despite the global economic impact from COVID-19, and surged strongly in the first half of 2021. ...
Thursday, 26 August 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
24th of August 2021, the Baltic Dry Index reached 4,201, a YTD high and the highest since May 2010.
Cape 5TC daily average @ 51,472
...
Tuesday, 24 August 21
COAL PRICE RALLY TO PRESSURE CHINESE POWER GENCOS’ MARGINS FITCH RATINGS
Fitch Ratings expects the pressure on Chinese power generation companies’ (gencos) profit from the recent coal price surge to weaken their cr ...
Tuesday, 24 August 21
TIGHT POWER SUPPLY IN CHINA AMID STRONG DEMAND, HIGH COAL PRICES - FITCH RATINGS
China experienced tight power supply in 1H21 on stronger than expected power demand as economic activity continued to recover, Fitch Ratings says i ...
|
|
|
Showing 496 to 500 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Planning Commission, India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- White Energy Company Limited
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Australian Coal Association
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Parliament of New Zealand
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
