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.
|
|
Tuesday, 02 June 20
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX DOWN 0.86 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 123.95 points Monday, down 0.86 percent week on week.
The index, released by Chi ...
Tuesday, 02 June 20
THE HISTORIC DECLINE OF US COAL - WOOD MACKENZIE
The first commercial power plant in the US was Thomas Edison’s coal-fired Pearl Street station in lower Manhattan, which started operating in ...
Tuesday, 02 June 20
COAL INDIA'S MAY SALES DRIVEN SHARPLY LOWER BY SLUMP IN POWER DEMAND - REUTER
Coal India’s sales fell 23.3% in May as utilities refrained from purchases amid record stockpiles and tepid demand because of a nationwide lo ...
Tuesday, 02 June 20
TUAH TURANGGA AGUNG RECORDED 4.54 MILLION TONS OF COAL SALES IN THE FIRST FOUR MONTHS OF 2020
PT United Tractors Tbk through its subsidiary, PT Tuah Turangga Agung recorded 4.54 million tons of coal sales in the first four months of 2020, up ...
Tuesday, 02 June 20
SOURING SINO-AUSTRALIA TRADE RELATIONS - BALTIC EXCHANGE
Cooling relations between the commodity powerhouses of China and Australia may point to trade troubles ahead when the world emerges from the Covid- ...
|
|
|
Showing 936 to 940 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- The University of Queensland
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Australian Coal Association
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Planning Commission, India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
