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, 26 May 21
NEW POWER AND ENERGY MASTER PLAN MUST BE DESIGNED IN BANGLADESH'S BEST INTERESTS, NOT JAPAN'S - IEEFA
JICA must deliver a low or zero emissions plan as promised, not fund Matarbari 2 coal plant
Clear understandings from the Bangladesh ...
Tuesday, 25 May 21
KOREA SOUTHERN POWER INVITED BIDS FOR 870,000 MT OF MIN 5300 NCV COAL FOR 2021 TO 2023.
COALspot.com: Korea Southern Power Co., Ltd. (KOSPO) has issued an International tender for total 870,000 MT of Min 5,300 kcal/kg NCV coal for Augu ...
Tuesday, 25 May 21
CHINA’S COAL OUTPUT RISES IN FIRST FOUR MONTHS - XINHUA
China’s raw coal output rose 11.1 percent year on year to 1.29 billion tonnes in the first four months of 2021, official data showed.
&nb ...
Tuesday, 25 May 21
MARINE SHIPPERS BULK UP: ANOTHER GAME OF CHICKEN IN THE WORKS? - THE KOREA TIMES
Global shipping companies have been placing orders for large ships, with many anticipating further increased competition within the next three year ...
Friday, 21 May 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
The dry bulk market’s counter seasonal surge so far into the first half of the year -in a sort of 2010 manner - and Capesize’s recent r ...
|
|
|
Showing 576 to 580 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- The University of Queensland
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Australian Coal Association
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- White Energy Company Limited
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- London Commodity Brokers - England
|
| |
| |
|
