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, 14 April 21
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX DOWN 1.10 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 138.05 points Monday, down 1.10 percent week on week.
The index, released by Chi ...
Wednesday, 14 April 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
After a series of months where the dry bulk sector was attracting most of the buying interest, tankers SnP activity spiked in the previous weeks. O ...
Tuesday, 13 April 21
INDONESIAN COAL PRICE REFERENCE IN APRIL UP AGAIN ON FIRM DEMAND
COALspot.com: The Indonesia coal price reference for April 2021 settles at US$ 86.68 per ton FOB vessel.
The Indonesia coal pr ...
Monday, 12 April 21
CHINA'S ECONOMIC RECOVERY PUSHES COAL MINES TO INCREASE YIELD - GLOBAL TIMES
China’s fast economic rebound from coronavirus has driven up electricity demand, leading to higher consumption of coal which is seeing rising ...
Monday, 12 April 21
GLOBAL COAL PRODUCTION EXPECTED TO RISE BY 3.5% IN 2021, SAYS GLOBALDATA
Global coal output is estimated to have declined by 2% in 2020 due to COVID-19-related lockdowns and restrictions, with significant reductions obse ...
|
|
|
Showing 601 to 605 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Planning Commission, India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Australian Coal Association
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- PTC India Limited - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
