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, 07 May 20
CRUDE OIL TANKER EARNINGS DROP 68% IN NINE DAYS - BIMCO
Crude oil tanker earnings have come down sharply in recent weeks with Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) earnings from the Middle East Gulf to China d ...
Thursday, 07 May 20
UKRAINE PRODUCES 2.5 MLN TONNES OF COAL IN APRIL - UKRINFORM
Ukraine produced 2.5 million tonnes of coal in April 2020, which is 39% less than planned, according to the Coal Miners Union of Ukraine.
...
Thursday, 07 May 20
INDIA: GOVT TO DO AWAY WITH MANDATORY WASHING OF COAL FOR THERMAL POWER UNITS - BUSINESS STANDARD
The Centre is planning to do away with the mandatory requirement of washing of coal before it is transported to thermal power stations. The Ministr ...
Thursday, 07 May 20
CIL'S SUPPLY TO POWER SECTOR FALLS IN MARCH AMID SLUMP IN COAL DEMAND - PTI
The supply of coal to the power sector by state-owned CIL registered a decline of eight per cent to 42.30 million tonne in March in the wake of slu ...
Thursday, 07 May 20
COAL PRICE REFERENCE FALL SHARPLY IN MAY 2020 DUE TO CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK
COALspot.com: The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources of the Republic of Indonesia has revised down the benchmark price of Indonesian thermal ...
|
|
|
Showing 981 to 985 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- PTC India Limited - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Planning Commission, India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Economic Council, Georgia
|
| |
| |
|
