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, 12 August 20
THE COAL MARKET IN ITALY - ASSOCARBONI
Italy, which in 2019 reported a decrease in thermal coal imports, with a volume of 7,5 million tons (-32% compared to 11 million tons in 2018), whi ...
Wednesday, 12 August 20
U.S. COAL PRODUCTION IN 2020 WILL DECREASE BY 29% FROM 2019 LEVELS TO 502 MMST - EIA
U.S. coal consumption, which dropped to its lowest point since April, totaled 95 MMst in the second quarter of 2020.
EIA expec ...
Tuesday, 11 August 20
BHP COAL ASSETS WORTH A BILLION LESS THAN JUST TWO YEARS AGO - IEEFA
Another global investor, the UK’s biggest public pension fund NEST, has withdrawn funds from BHP this week because the company is profiting & ...
Monday, 10 August 20
COAL IMPORT DROPS 43% IN JULY OWING TO HIGH STOCKPILE AT PITHEADS, PLANTS - PTI
“The market participants seem to have adopted a wait and watch approach and are currently looking for a direction. We do not expect to see an ...
Saturday, 08 August 20
GLOBAL COAL POWER PUZZLE - BALTIC EXCHANGE
Global Energy Monitor’s latest Global Coal Plant Tracker has put another nail in the coffin for the coal-carrying fleet with its finding that ...
|
|
|
Showing 836 to 840 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- The University of Queensland
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- PTC India Limited - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Australian Coal Association
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Parliament of New Zealand
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
|
| |
| |
|
