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, 30 April 21
HIGH-SULPHUR FUEL OIL SALES REBOUND AFTER PRE-IMO 2020 - BIMCO
HSFO sales are up 47.2% from Q1 2020, reaching 3.1m tonnes. This is however still less than a third of high-sulphur fuel sales in Q1 2019, before t ...
Wednesday, 28 April 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Despite the current challenges as a result of the global pandemic, 2021 is turning out to be a landmark year for the iron ore market with spot pric ...
Monday, 26 April 21
CHINA TO FURTHER CUT COAL USE IN 2021 - XINHUA
China aims to reduce the share of coal in its energy mix to less than 56% this year, according to a guideline released by the National Energy Admin ...
Wednesday, 21 April 21
COAL FINANCING COSTS HAVE SURGED IN PAST 10 YEARS - UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD - THE GUARDIAN
Coal financing costs have surged over the last decade as investors demand returns four times as high as the payoff required from renewable energy p ...
Tuesday, 20 April 21
US DOLLAR LIBOR TRANSITION IN ASSET FINANCE - WHERE ARE WE NOW? - WATSON FARLEY & WILLIAMS
Since our last article, there has been a raft of regulatory and market body announcements relating to the transition away from LIBOR and the follow ...
|
|
|
Showing 591 to 595 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- White Energy Company Limited
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- The University of Queensland
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Parliament of New Zealand
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
|
| |
| |
|
