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, 25 November 20
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Over 90% of the world’s goods are transported by sea. LPG is a clean, energy efficient and portable fuel that is being marketed at an afforda ...
Friday, 20 November 20
CHINA'S BENCHMARK POWER COAL PRICE EDGES UP - XINHUA
China’s benchmark power coal price rose slightly during the past week.
The Bohai-Rim Steam-Coal Price Index (BSPI), a gauge of ...
Thursday, 19 November 20
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
As we are moving towards the end of the year, the overall deal landscape of the dry bulk sector corresponding to the second half of 2020 (up to dat ...
Tuesday, 17 November 20
COAL SQUEEZE INTENSIFIES - BALTIC EXCHANGE
The message from the top is clear: cut out coal. While the regulatory pressure has been evident for some time, the race to banish the black stuff s ...
Tuesday, 17 November 20
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX UP 0.35 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 128.72 points Monday, up 0.35 percent week on week.
The index, released by China ...
|
|
|
Showing 731 to 735 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- PTC India Limited - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Planning Commission, India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Minerals Council of Australia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Australian Coal Association
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
|
| |
| |
|
