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.
|
|
Thursday, 10 June 21
INDONESIA COAL EARNINGS RECOVERY TO SLOW AFTER STRONG 1Q - FITCH RATINGS
Fitch Ratings expects the recovery in operating and financial performance of Indonesian coal miners and coal contractors to slow during rest of 202 ...
Thursday, 10 June 21
U.S. COAL PRODUCTION TO TOTAL 600 MMST IN 2021, 11% MORE THAN IN 2020 - EIA
EIA expects U.S. coal production to total 600 million short tons (MMst) in 2021, which is 61 MMst (11%) more than in 2020.
The increase is dri ...
Wednesday, 09 June 21
SHIPTEK INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & AWARDS 2021
The In-Person Maritime Event
SHIPTEK INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & AWARDS 2021
culminates successfully in Dubai
Press Release: ...
Wednesday, 09 June 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
“Counter cyclical investments.” usually take place by investing in a “bad” market at the point that ensures that the acquir ...
Saturday, 05 June 21
KOMIPO INVITED 5600 NAR COAL OFFERS FOR THREE YEARS SUPPLY; 520,000 MT PER YEAR
COALspot.com: Korea Midland Power Co., Ltd (KOMIPO) has issued an international tender for total 1,560,000 MT of Bituminous Coal to be used a ...
|
|
|
Showing 556 to 560 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- White Energy Company Limited
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Planning Commission, India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
