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, 19 August 20
COAL INDIA TRADE UNIONS DEFER DAY-LONG STRIKE: PTI
The unions had decided to go on strike against the commercial mining and the proposed divestment or buyback of shares of Coal India Ltd (CIL).
...
Wednesday, 19 August 20
MISC MARKS ITS MAIDEN FORAY INTO MAJOR DEEP-WATER PROJECT IN LATIN AMERICA WITH MERO 3 FPSO
MISC Berhad (MISC) is pleased to announce its acceptance of Letter of Intent (LOI) from Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras) for the provisi ...
Wednesday, 19 August 20
MARKET INSIGHT - GEORGE LAIOS | INTERMODAL
Since the Covid-19 outbreak, governments and central banks around the globe have been using their ammunition and stimulus packages to keep their ec ...
Wednesday, 19 August 20
INDIA SAW A SHARP DECLINE IN ENERGY COAL IMPORTS IN JANUARY - JUNE 2020; –27 PER CENT YOY - BHP
Energy coal prices were weak in the second half of financial year 2020, BHP says in its Economic and Commodity Outlook FY20.
Accordi ...
Wednesday, 19 August 20
COAL PRICES TO REMAIN SUBDUED THIS FISCAL AMID WEAK DEMAND, HIGH INVENTORY - THE HINDU BUSINESS LINE
Coal offtake is improving gradually as lockdown eases
Coal prices are expected to remain subdued to weak demand and high inventory l ...
|
|
|
Showing 826 to 830 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- The University of Queensland
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- VISA Power Limited - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- PTC India Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Australian Coal Association
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- MS Steel International - UAE
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Planning Commission, India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
|
| |
| |
|
