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.
|
|
Friday, 29 July 22
GLENCORE TO SUPPLY COAL TO NIPPON STEEL AT $375 PER TON - BLOOMBERG
Glencore Plc, agreed to supply coal to Nippon Steel at one of the highest prices ever paid by the Japan Bloomberg reported on July 27.
...
Friday, 29 July 22
GLOBAL COAL DEMAND IS SET TO RETURN TO ITS ALL-TIME HIGH IN 2022 - IEA
The world’s consumption of coal is set to rise slightly in 2022, taking it back to the record level it reached nearly a decade ago, according ...
Thursday, 28 July 22
CREW FAMILIARISATION IS CRITICAL WHEN TAKING OVER A VESSEL - WEST P&I CLUB
Knowledge to Elevate
When a vessel changes ownership and/or manager, it can take some considerable time before the new crew and mana ...
Thursday, 28 July 22
RETURN OF COAL A THREAT TO EUROPEAN COMPANIES' ESG RATINGS - REUTERS
European companies turning to coal as an alternative to Russian gas face a hit to their environmental, social and governance ratings, leaving them ...
Wednesday, 27 July 22
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Amid the upcoming ban on Russian coal from the EU, which will be in full effect on August 10th, EU nations have been accelerating their coal import ...
|
|
|
Showing 271 to 275 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- The University of Queensland
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- White Energy Company Limited
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Australian Coal Association
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
|
| |
| |
|
