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.
|
|
Wednesday, 28 July 21
IN THE PHILIPPINES, COAL’S DEMISE MAKES WAY FOR A RENEWABLE ENERGY BOOM - IEEFA
Imported gas lock-in could undermine the economic benefits of a clean energy transition
The Philippines’ energy sector is on t ...
Wednesday, 28 July 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Assessing the ship repair sector during this first half of the year, we continue to come across surprises and new restrictions which are trembling ...
Saturday, 24 July 21
UNDERSTANDING INDIA'S LATEST PEAK POWER DEMAND RECORD - IEEFA
Ramping up solar will be crucial as peak power demand hits during the day
At around noon on 7 July 2021, India’s instantaneous ...
Wednesday, 21 July 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Dry Buk Sales and Purchase activity has heated up during 2021, reaching record high levels during the first half of the year. The increased interes ...
Monday, 19 July 21
CHINA'S COAL OUTPUT UP 6.4 PCT IN H1 - XINHUA
China’s raw coal output climbed 6.4 percent year on year to 1.95 billion tonnes in the first six months of the year, official data showed.
...
|
|
|
Showing 516 to 520 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Planning Commission, India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- PTC India Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
|
| |
| |
|
