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.
|
|
Monday, 29 June 20
CHINA COAL IMPORT OUTLOOK: MANY MOVING PARTS, FORECAST TO FALL 10% YOY - GHEE PEH | IEEFA
China’s coal demand declined in the first quarter of 2020. According to the China National Coal Association, the country consumed 870mt in th ...
Monday, 29 June 20
ULTRAMAX: A 58,000 FIXING DELIVERY SINGAPORE TRIP, VIA EAST COAST INDIA, REDELIVERY CHINA IN THE LOW $12,000S - BALTIC BRIEFING
Capesize
As the halfway mark of 2020 arrives, the capesize market is making new highs for the year. From persistent lows earlier caused by a ba ...
Saturday, 27 June 20
CHINA'S BENCHMARK POWER COAL PRICE REMAINS FLAT - XINHUA
China’s benchmark power coal price remained flat during the past week.
The Bohai-Rim Steam-Coal Price Index (BSPI), a gauge of ...
Friday, 26 June 20
WHAT TODAY'S BAILOUTS CAN DO FOR TOMORROW'S ECONOMIES - WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM
The COVID-19 crisis provides an opportunity for governments to build fairer, more sustainable and more resilient economies.
Governments a ...
Thursday, 25 June 20
ALL YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT COAL MINE AUCTIONS - THE HINDU BUSINESS LINE
Last week, Prime Minister Narendra Modi threw open the auction of 41 coal blocks for commercial mining. The decision, which was part of the announc ...
|
|
|
Showing 891 to 895 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- White Energy Company Limited
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- PTC India Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
|
| |
| |
|
