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.
|
|
Monday, 12 September 22
COAL PRICE HIKE REMAINS DIFFICULT FOR CIL: CHAIRMAN TELLS ANALYSTS - PTI
Coal India on Thursday informed investors that increasing coal prices remains difficult in the current context when the economy is grappling with h ...
Friday, 09 September 22
GREECE WILL KEEP COAL-FIRED PLANTS RUNNING FOR LONGER AMID GAS CRISIS - REUTERS
Greece will keep seven coal-fired plants running for longer than previously planned as European countries adjust to a cut in gas flows coming from ...
Friday, 09 September 22
CHINA'S DROUGHT INTENSIFIES GLOBAL COAL SHORTAGE - REUTERS
China’s drought has sent coal prices surging as traders anticipate the lack of hydroelectric generation will force it to burn more coal to me ...
Thursday, 08 September 22
MOODY.S AFFIRMS ABM INVESTAMA'S B1 RATINGS FOLLOWING PLANNED MINORITY INVESTMENT IN COAL MINER; OUTLOOK STABLE
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed ABM Investama Tbk (P.T.)'s B1 corporate family rating (CFR), along with the B1 rating on its senior ...
Thursday, 08 September 22
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
While the energy markets are historically stretched, Russian flows of crude oil are closely monitored as the oil trade is ultimately realigned. Mor ...
|
|
|
Showing 241 to 245 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- The University of Queensland
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Planning Commission, India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Australian Coal Association
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
