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, 08 September 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
Last August was extremely hot in the dry bulk market with rates rising at levels that we have years to witness. The dry bulk index exceeded the 4,0 ...
Wednesday, 01 September 21
KOMIPO TO BUY 1.56 MILLION TONS OF 5600 NAR COAL OF AUSTRALIA OR SOUTH AFRICAN ORIGIN FOR 2022 - 2024
COALspot.com: Korea Midland Power Co., Ltd (KOMIPO) has issued an international tender for total 1,560,000 MT of Bituminous Coal to be used a ...
Wednesday, 01 September 21
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
As the summer season is coming to an end, the dry bulk market continues to rally. The confidence that the outstanding freight market performance ha ...
Monday, 30 August 21
68% OF U.S. COAL FLEET RETIREMENTS SINCE 2011 WERE PLANTS FUELED BY BITUMINOUS COAL - EIA
In 2011, the United States had 317.6 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired electric generation capacity. About 88.7 GW of that capacity was retired in the d ...
Friday, 27 August 21
ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT COAL'S MASSIVE RALLY AND NEAR-TERM OUTLOOK - CNBCTV18
Australia’s thermal coal at Newcastle Port, the benchmark for the vast Asian market, has surged over 100 percent this year to trade above $16 ...
|
|
|
Showing 491 to 495 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Australian Coal Association
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- PTC India Limited - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- The University of Queensland
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
