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, 01 December 23
COAL MINERS GROUP EXPECTS INDONESIA’S 2023 COAL OUTPUT TO SURPASS TARGET - REUTERS
The Indonesian Coal Mining Association (ICMA) expects the country’s 2023 coal output to surpass the official target of 695 million metric ton ...
Friday, 24 November 23
COAL IMPORTS TO INDIA IN OCTOBER 2023 REACHED HIGHEST LEVELS IN NEARLY A YEAR AND A HALF - VESSELSVALUE, VESON NAUTICAL
In October, coal imports to India reached 13.8 mt in October 2023, according to Oceanbolt, a Veson Nautical solution, the highest level since May 2 ...
Friday, 24 November 23
COAL SHIPMENTS TO ADVANCED ECONOMIES DOWN 17% SO FAR IN 2023 - BIMCO
In the first ten months of 2023, coal shipments to advanced economies fell by 17% y/y, as demand for electricity declined and the share of electric ...
Friday, 24 November 23
INTELLIGENT COAL MINES CONTRIBUTE TO IMPROVING SAFETY STANDARDS - CHINA DAILY
Mechanization, automation and intelligent upgrades have contributed to improved safety in coal mines, though the level of development of intelligen ...
Friday, 24 November 23
WHY AUSTRALIA'S COAL MINES ARE GETTING BIGGER - IEEFA
Australia’s largest coal mines are getting larger. Mines in New South Wales (NSW) are ramping up production following the state’s recov ...
|
|
|
Showing 66 to 70 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Planning Commission, India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- PTC India Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
|
| |
| |
|
