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, 13 October 22
OPEC DOWNGRADES CRUDE OIL DEMAND, AS WORLD ECONOMY ENTERS SLOWDOWN
Crude Oil Price Movements
The OPEC Reference Basket (ORB) declined m-o-m by $6.58 in September, or 6.5%, to average $95.32/b. Pressure from equ ...
Wednesday, 12 October 22
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Sale and Purchase activity during the first three quarters of 2022 has been remarkable.
Focusing only on Tankers and Bulkers, such v ...
Monday, 10 October 22
ENERGY TRANSITION BOOSTS GLOBAL LONG-TERM DEMAND FOR METALS - FITCH RATINGS
The energy transition will significantly increase demand for metals used in manufacturing of electric vehicles (EVs) and renewable power generation ...
Monday, 10 October 22
GLOBAL CEOS EXPECT IMPENDING RECESSION TO BE 'SHORT AND SHARP,' POLL SHOWS - CNBC
Global CEOs are anticipating a recession in the next 12 months, according to a new survey by professional services firm KPMG, which said more than ...
Thursday, 06 October 22
AUSTRALIA’S RESOURCES REVENUE TO HIT RECORD AMID UKRAINE CONFLICT - REUTERS
Australian resources and energy export earnings are forecast to jump 7% to a record A$450 billion ($290 billion) this fiscal year, bolstered by soa ...
|
|
|
Showing 211 to 215 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- The University of Queensland
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Planning Commission, India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- PTC India Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Minerals Council of Australia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Australian Coal Association
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
