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, 06 October 21
EUROPEAN COAL FUTURES CLIMB TO 13-YEAR PEAK - REUTERS
European coal futures rose to a 13-year high and physical thermal coal prices were at record highs as rallying gas prices and strong Asian demand f ...
Tuesday, 05 October 21
CAPESIZE MARKET WAS IN A STEEP CLIMB FOR MOST OF THIS WEEK - BALTIC EXCHANGE
Capesize
The Capesize market was in a steep climb for most of this week as it reached a pinnacle of $74,786 Wednesday before stalling, regather ...
Wednesday, 29 September 21
THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL: AUSTRALIA’S COAL ERA IS OVER - YAHOO!FINANCE
As the fringe of Australian politics strives to pump up the coal industry, facts show that coal production has started its long run decline.
&n ...
Wednesday, 29 September 21
SURGING COAL PRICES SPLIT ASIAN BUYERS INTO RICH AND POOR - REUTERS
As seaborne coal in Asia trades at, or near, record highs, there are early signs of demand destruction, especially among price-sensitive buyers suc ...
Wednesday, 29 September 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Tanker Asset values have surprised to the upside, despite the downward pressure on the freight market. Tanker rates have been hovering close to the ...
|
|
|
Showing 471 to 475 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Planning Commission, India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- White Energy Company Limited
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Australian Coal Association
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- The University of Queensland
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
