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, 06 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, 05 November 20
THE INDONESIA COAL PRICE REFERENCE RISES FOR SECOND CONSECUTIVE MONTH
COALspot.com: The Indonesia Coal Price Reference rose for a 2nd month by 9.24% month on month. The Indonesia Coal Price Reference for the month of ...
Wednesday, 04 November 20
PHILIPPINES COAL MORATORIUM HIGHLIGHTS DRAMATIC PIVOT TO RENEWABLE ENERGY INVESTMENT FOR LOWER PRICES AND POWER SYSTEM RESILIENCE - IEEFA
Policymakers and industry leaders ready to embrace new energy technologies
The Department of Energy’s call for a moratorium on ...
Wednesday, 04 November 20
FOREIGN INVESTORS FACE TOUGH TIMES CLOSING VIETNAM’S REMAINING COAL POWER DEALS - IEEFA
Project bankability at risk as new regulations threaten usual contractual terms
Foreign investors will face higher-than-usual risks ...
Wednesday, 04 November 20
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
As the end of the year approaches, one would definitely notice that the newbuilding orderbook for bulk carriers is significantly smaller compared t ...
|
|
|
Showing 741 to 745 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- PTC India Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- The University of Queensland
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Planning Commission, India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
|
| |
| |
|
