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, 17 July 23
APPROVED AMMONIA-FUELED CONTAINERSHIP - BENEFITS AND RISKS: REED SMITH
Following the news in Offshore Energy that Korea Maritime Consultants has secured approval in principle from the American Bureau of Shipping for it ...
Friday, 14 July 23
CLEAN COAL USE KEY TO DEEP CUTS IN EMISSIONS, STABLE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY - CHINA DAILY
China must push for the clean use of coal and step up integration of the dirty fuel with carbon capture, utilization and storage to achieve sustain ...
Thursday, 13 July 23
VIETNAM'S COAL EMISSIONS PRIMED FOR SURGE AFTER IMPORTS JUMP - REUTERS
Vietnam’s thermal power emissions are primed for a steep climb this summer after the country’s imports of thermal coal soared to their ...
Monday, 26 June 23
COAL PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION UP IN 2022 - EUROSTAT
In 2022, EU coal production and consumption continued to increase, reaching 349 million tonnes (+5% compared with the previous year) and 454 millio ...
Wednesday, 21 June 23
QATAR STRIKES SECOND BIG LNG SUPPLY DEAL WITH CHINA - REUTERS
Qatar on Tuesday secured its second large gas supply deal with a Chinese state-controlled company in less than a year, putting Asia clearly ahead i ...
|
|
|
Showing 91 to 95 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Planning Commission, India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Australian Coal Association
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Parliament of New Zealand
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- White Energy Company Limited
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- The University of Queensland
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
