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.
|
|
Wednesday, 13 July 22
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Taking the previous market insight a step further, market sentiment remains bullish regarding the overall ROI of scrubbers, facing tailwinds from a ...
Friday, 08 July 22
AUSTRALIAN COAL PRICE BREAKS AGAIN LEVEL US$ 400/TON!, UP AROUND 4% - CNBC INDONESIA
Coal prices shot up again and crossed the level of US$ 400 per ton. On Thursday (7/7/2022) trading, the selling price of August contract closed at ...
Friday, 08 July 22
INDONESIA MULLS MORE FREQUENT SETTING OF CRUDE PALM OIL REFERENCE PRICE - REUTERS
Indonesia is considering setting its crude palm oil (CPO) export reference price every two weeks instead of monthly, a senior trade ministry offici ...
Friday, 08 July 22
BUNKER PRICES EXPECTED TO RECOVER LOST GROUND NEXT WEEK - SERGEY IVANOV, MABUX
Over the Week 27, the world bunker indices showed a sharp decline, primarily due to the fall in oil prices on July 05. The 380 HSFO index fell by 5 ...
Thursday, 07 July 22
NTPC MINES 61% MORE COAL AT 4.22 MN METRIC TONNES IN APRIL-JUNE: PTI
State-owned power giant NTPC on Tuesday said that its coal output grew by 61 per cent to Rs 42.40 lakh metric tonnes in April-June quarter from 26. ...
|
|
|
Showing 296 to 300 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Australian Coal Association
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
|
| |
| |
|
