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, 02 February 22
COAL STORAGE IN CHINA’S POWER PLANTS NEAR RECORD HIGHS - XINHUA
Coal inflows into China’s power plants have picked up, bringing their coal storage to near record highs, the National Development and Reform ...
Wednesday, 02 February 22
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Oil prices have rallied to the highest level since October 2014 breaking above $90/bbl recently. November 2014 was the point when OPEC unleashed pr ...
Monday, 31 January 22
HOW INDONESIA'S COAL EXPORT BAN COULD IMPACT INDIA - IEEFA
What does it mean for power generation and energy security?
Not long ago, India faced coal shortages due to a decline in domestic co ...
Sunday, 30 January 22
AIR PRODUCTS' COAL GASIFICATION PROPOSAL TRIGGERS LOOMING POLICY DISPUTES IN INDONESIA - IEEFA
Plan to substitute Indonesia’s LPG imports with dimethyl ether may be hard to realize due to conflicting business interests
In ...
Sunday, 30 January 22
ENDGAME FOR NEW COAL POWER PROJECTS? - IEEFA INDIA
Retired coal units must be replaced only by assets that can provide grid flexibility
Reportedly, an expert committee appointed by th ...
|
|
|
Showing 361 to 365 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Australian Coal Association
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- The University of Queensland
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
