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, 12 May 21
U.S. COAL PRODUCTION TO INCREASE BY 43 MMST IN 2021 TOTAL 582 MILLION SHORT TONS - EIA
U.S. energy Information Administration expects U.S. coal production to total 582 million short tons (MMst) in 2021, 43 MMst (8%) more than in 2020. ...
Wednesday, 12 May 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Tanker S&P is finally back!
For an extended period, Dry bulk & Wet market rates have been diverging, with the SnP deals on each sect ...
Monday, 10 May 21
PAKISTAN: COAL GASIFICATION AND LIQUEFACTION HARMFUL TO ECONOMY - IEEFA
There is no second life for coal
Pakistan’s intention to use coal for power production through gasification and liquefaction technologie ...
Sunday, 09 May 21
HERE'S WHY INVESTORS ARE POURING MONEY INTO COAL, DESPITE ITS BLEAK FUTURE - FORBES
Coal stocks have surged this year – along with the wider energy sector – but experts warn these are likely short-term gains for an indu ...
Sunday, 09 May 21
MAYBANK TO STOP COAL FINANCING - BERNAMA
Malayan Banking Bhd (Maybank) will stop financing new coal activities as part of its sustainable agenda.
Currently, coal financing m ...
|
|
|
Showing 581 to 585 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Australian Coal Association
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- The University of Queensland
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
|
| |
| |
|
