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.
|
|
Tuesday, 22 December 20
INDIA'S COAL DEMAND IS SET TO EXPAND DESPITE PLUMMETING IN 2020 - IEA
Coal consumption in India amounted to 979 Mt in 2019, with the largest share being thermal coal (including lignite) for electricity generation (687 ...
Tuesday, 22 December 20
SOUTHEAST ASIA'S COAL DEMAND IS SET TO EXPAND AFTER THE PANDEMIC-INDUCED HIATUS IN 2020 - IEA
Coal consumption in Southeast Asia has more than doubled in the last decade, with the largest growth in Indonesia and Viet Nam, followed by Malaysi ...
Tuesday, 22 December 20
COAL DEMAND IS RISING QUICKLY IN PAKISTAN AND MORE SLOWLY IN BANGLADESH - IEA
Pakistan had 150 MW of installed coal power capacity in 2015. Since 2017, in addition to a few small plants for industry, Pakistan has commissioned ...
Tuesday, 22 December 20
AFRICA PERSPECTIVE INDICATES NO MAJOR SHIFTS FOR COAL CONSUMPTION - IEA
Overall countries on the African continent consumed 197 Mt of coal in 2019, 12 Mt less (-6%) than 2018.
South Africa, the continent& ...
Monday, 21 December 20
COAL PRICES WITHSTAND DESPITE COVID-19 AND CHINESE IMPORT QUOTAS - IEA
Coal prices vary by region as well as by grade and quality. The price rebound starting in 2016 ended in 2018, moving in a downward trend in 2019. A ...
|
|
|
Showing 691 to 695 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- PTC India Limited - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
|
| |
| |
|
