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, 24 March 20
THE TRIPLE SHOCK OF CORONAVIRUS IN SHIPPING: WILL IT LAST? - DREWRY
Transport capacity shortages, disruptions to supply chains and inability to plan since late January have been a dangerous combination. But will all ...
Tuesday, 24 March 20
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX DOWN 0.28 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 132.74 points Monday, down 0.28 percent week on week.
The index, released by Chi ...
Monday, 23 March 20
CHARTERPARTY REQUIREMENTS TO NOTIFY CLAIMS - TAKE CARE! - WFW
KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
Voyage charterparties frequently require the owner to notify any claim with supporting documents within a relatively shor ...
Monday, 23 March 20
COAL INDIA LIMITED'S ONE-DAY OUTPUT PEAKS AT 3.17 MT - THE HINDU
Coal India Limited (CIL) output peaked at a new high of 3.17 million tonnes (MT) on March 20, overtaking the 3.14 MT production recorded on March 2 ...
Monday, 23 March 20
KOMIPO INVITED BIDS FOR 1.45 MILLION TONS OF COAL FOR JUNE & JULY 2020 LOADING
COALspot.com: Korea Midland Power Co.,Ltd (KOMIPO), on behalf of five Korean Gencos, has issued an international tender for total 1,450,000 MT (&pl ...
|
|
|
Showing 1051 to 1055 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- The University of Queensland
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
