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 October 20
CHINA COKING COAL FUTURES RALLY ON REPORTED BAN ON AUSTRALIA CARGOES - REUTERS
Dalian coking coal futures rallied for a sixth straight session on Tuesday after reports surfaced that China had stopped buying coal from Australia ...
Wednesday, 14 October 20
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
The tanker market has experienced severe freight rate and asset value declines over the past 5 months. A potential market upturn may arise in the c ...
Friday, 09 October 20
INDIA'S COAL IMPORTS IMPROVE SOMEWHAT, BUT RECOVERY IS UNEVEN - REUTERS
India’s coal imports, depressed by the impact of coronavirus this year, regained ground in September, but in an uneven uptick – shipmen ...
Thursday, 08 October 20
CHINA'S COAL IMPORTS FROM INDONESIA DECLINED 16.4% Y-O-Y, TO 80.2 MLN TONNES IN THE FIRST 9 MONTHS OF 2020 - BANCHERO COSTA
China's coal imports boomed in 2019, surprising many who had expected the government would clamp down strictly on shipments.
...
Thursday, 08 October 20
GLIMMER OF LIGHT FOR COAL, BUT SHORT TERM - FNARENA
Is coal on the rebound? Demand appears stronger and supply reductions have underpinned a tightening market. Certainly, the Newcastle thermal coal p ...
|
|
|
Showing 761 to 765 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Parliament of New Zealand
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Minerals Council of Australia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- The University of Queensland
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
|
| |
| |
|
