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.
|
|
Thursday, 14 May 20
OPEC REVISES DOWN GLOBAL OIL DEMAND FORECAST AGAIN
Crude Oil Price Movements
Crude oil prices recorded a second sharp monthly drop in April, amid an increasing oil surplus in the spot market. Th ...
Thursday, 14 May 20
NEW COVID-19 GUIDELINES FOCUS ON SAFE INTERFACE BETWEEN SHIP AND SHORE STAFF - GARD
At a time when the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting the global population, it is important that ships’ crew and port workers protect each other ...
Wednesday, 13 May 20
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX DOWN 0.4 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 124.93 points Monday, down 0.4 percent week on week.
The index, released by Chin ...
Tuesday, 12 May 20
IN THE FIRST 4 MONTHS OF 2020, SOUTH KOREA IMPORTED 46.6 MLN TONNES OF CRUDE OIL BY SEA, A NET DECLINE OF 14.1% YOY - BC
South Korea is certainly one of the countries which has handled better the current Covid-19 crisis. In the first week of May 2020, new cases of ...
Tuesday, 12 May 20
OIL MARKET TURBULENCE PIVOTS FOCUS ON FLOATING STORAGE TECHNICAL NEEDS - LLOYD'S REGISTER
KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
Negative oil prices and off-the-scale volatility in crude markets are positive for floating storage, as the next chapter ...
|
|
|
Showing 966 to 970 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Parliament of New Zealand
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Planning Commission, India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- White Energy Company Limited
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
|
| |
| |
|
