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, 23 May 23
INDIA: COAL OUTPUT UP 8.9%, SUPPLY RISES 11.7% IN APRIL - FINANCIAL EXPRESS
India’s coal production jumped 8.85% to 73.14 million tonne (MT) in April 2023 and the total coal despatch during the month went up 11.66% to ...
Tuesday, 23 May 23
CHINA COAL OUTPUT UP 4.5 PCT IN APRIL - XINHUA
China’s raw coal output posted stable expansion in April, official data showed.
The country produced 380 million tonnes of raw ...
Saturday, 20 May 23
NON-OPEC OIL SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT - OPEC
In 2022, non-OPEC supply is estimated to have increased by 1.9 mb/d y-o-y. Out of this, US liquids production increased by 1.2 mb/d, mainly on the ...
Saturday, 20 May 23
GLOBAL COAL TRADE HAS REALLY PICKED UP PACE IN RECENT MONTHS, NOW FULLY BACK TO PRE-COVID LEVELS - BANCHERO COSTA
Global coal trade has really picked up pace in recent months, and is now fully back to pre-Covid levels. In Jan-Apr 2023, total global seaborne coa ...
Saturday, 20 May 23
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
India is one of the world's largest coal producers and one of the world's largest importers of coal. The country uses coal mainly for power ...
|
|
|
Showing 101 to 105 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- The University of Queensland
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- PTC India Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Planning Commission, India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- White Energy Company Limited
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Australian Coal Association
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
|
| |
| |
|
