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, 19 July 22
SEEING RED? - WOOD MACKENZIE
What a Republican mid-term victory could mean for US energy and climate policy
According to current polling the Republican Party has ...
Thursday, 14 July 22
INDIA'S COAL IMPORTS HIT RECORD HIGH IN JUNE - REUTERS
India's coal imports hit a record high in June despite high global prices, data from three trade sources and Refinitiv ship tracking showed, as ...
Thursday, 14 July 22
CHINA'S JUNE COAL IMPORTS SLUMP AS TRADERS SHUN EXPENSIVE OVERSEAS CARGOES - REUTERS
China’s coal imports fell 33% in June from a year ago, with traders turning down expensive overseas cargoes in favor of domestic ones with ca ...
Wednesday, 13 July 22
KOWEPO TO IMPORT 2.79 MILLION TONS OF LOW TO MEDIUM COAL
COALspot.com: Korea Western Power Co., Ltd. (KOWEPO) has issued an International tender for Total 1360k MT of Min.4400 kcal/kg NCV coal and Total 1 ...
Wednesday, 13 July 22
HAVE MINERS MISSED THE BOAT TO INVEST AND GET AHEAD OF THE ENERGY TRANSITION? - WOOD MACKENZIE
Miners are in rude health, benefiting from economic stimuli, the post-pandemic recovery and associated supply constraints. Initially the Ukraine wa ...
|
|
|
Showing 291 to 295 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Australian Coal Association
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- White Energy Company Limited
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- The University of Queensland
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Parliament of New Zealand
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- PTC India Limited - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Planning Commission, India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
|
| |
| |
|
