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, 20 September 22
CHINA COAL OUTPUT UP 8.1 PCT IN AUGUST - XINHUA
China’s raw coal output posted stable expansion in August, official data showed.
The country produced 370 million tonnes of ra ...
Monday, 19 September 22
BUMA AUSTRALIA AWARDED A$400 MILLION CONTRACT EXTENSION BY BMA FOR GOONYELLA PROJECT
Press Release – PT Delta Dunia Makmur Tbk. (the "Company") announced that its subsidiary, PT Bukit Makmur Mandiri Utama ("BUMA ...
Saturday, 17 September 22
CHINA WARNS COAL COMPANIES AGAINST DUAL CONTRACTS, KEEP PRICES STABLE - REUTERS
China’s state economic planner warned coal companies operating at ports in the Bohai Bay region to comply with their long-term contracts to k ...
Saturday, 17 September 22
IS A GLOBAL RECESSION IMMINENT? - WORLD BANK
Since the beginning of the year, a rapid deterioration of growth prospects coupled with rising inflation and tightening financing conditions, has i ...
Saturday, 17 September 22
FITCH RATINGS REVISES GLOBAL METALS & MINING PRICE ASSUMPTIONS
Fitch Ratings has revised its metals and mining price assumptions reflecting evolving economic growth expectations and demand and supply dynamics.
...
|
|
|
Showing 231 to 235 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Planning Commission, India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- The University of Queensland
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- PTC India Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
