We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining,
shipping, etc.
To Submit your article please click here.
|
|
|
Saturday, 12 April 14
HOW DO YOU CALCULATE LOSS OF EARNINGS FOLLOWING A COLLISION? - INCE & CO
 KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
The recent case of Astipalaia vs Hanjin Shenzhen [2014] EWHC 120 (Admlty) has revisited the existing case law on assessment of damages following a collision and provided further clarification as to the appropriate test to be applied. On 26 March 2008 there was a collision between the fully laden VLCC tanker Astipalaia and the container ship Hanjin Shenzhen in the approaches to Singapore where Astipalaia was due to discharge. As a result of the collision, Astipalaia suffered damage to her hull, guard rails and mooring chock. Astipalaia was able to proceed into Singapore to discharge her cargo.
The background facts
At the time of the collision, Astipalaia was trading in the VLCC spot market which in early-mid 2008 was particularly buoyant and the vessel was acceptable throughout the industry to oil majors and other first class charterers. However, Astipalaia was unfixed for her next employment at the time of the collision.
As a result of the incident, the vessel’s oil major approvals were temporarily placed on “technical hold” by the majors pending the usual investigation into the collision. Astipalaia was also required by class to undertake permanent repairs before any further employment.
Astipalaia sailed from Singapore to Dubai in ballast and entered dry dock for permanent repairs which lasted around 10 days. On exiting dry dock, Astipalaia was still unable to resume trading on the VLCC spot market as the “technical hold” had not then been lifted. In the absence of oil major approvals, Astipalaia was fixed to NITC to be employed as floating storage off Kharg Island, Iran on a 60 day period charter, during which time the “technical holds” were dealt with and lifted. She completed the NITC fixture and was redelivered at Fujairah on 29 June 2008 after which she resumed her normal pattern of spot trading.
Accordingly, despite the time in dry dock only lasting some 10 days, Astipalaia was effectively unavailable for her primary trading market for the entire period from 26 March 2008 to 29 June 2008. Astipalaia brought a claim for loss of profits based on what the vessel would have earned had she traded on the normal VLCC spot market during that period, giving credit for the mitigation earnings obtained while on charter as floating storage to NITC. The total amount claimed by Astipalaia was approximately US$5,640,000 lost income during that period.
The Reference to the Registrar
Following agreement on liability, the quantum of Astipalaia’s claim was disputed and referred for determination by the Admiralty Registrar. The Court had to consider how to calculate loss of earnings of Astipalaia in circumstances where (1) the vessel did not have a specific next fixture concluded at the time of the collision such that there was no certainty as to what the vessel would have earned next, but for the collision, and (2) the vessel’s oil major approvals had been placed on “technical hold” and were not reinstated until the end of a less lucrative storage fixture.
Astipalaia’s position
Astipalaia’s Owners contended that damages should be assessed on the basis that the best evidence of Astipalaia’s potential earnings, but for the collision, were that Astipalaia would either (i) have been fixed to Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) with whom they had been negotiating for a West Africa-East Coast India fixture at the time of the collision, after which Astipalaia would have resumed a ‘typical’ spot trading pattern of a round voyage from Arabian Gulf (AG) to the Far East, or (ii) had Owners not secured the IOC fixture, the vessel would have undertaken two AG-Far East round voyages. Under either alternative, these two hypothetical voyages would have been completed within roughly the same period of time as the detention period, i.e. by 29 June 2008, such that a reasonable comparison could be drawn between what the vessel could have earned during that period, with what she did in fact earn.
Astipalaia’s Owners relied on the “time equalisation method” set out in The Vicky 1 [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 45, which they argued supported their approach of comparing what the vessel would probably have earned but for the collision with what she did in fact earn in the same period. The hypothetical voyage schedule advocated by the Astipalaia’s Owners and prepared by their expert sought to provide comparable fixtures she could (but not necessarily would) have performed in the detention period in order to place a value on the vessel’s lost earnings. On that basis Astipalaia claimed damages of approximately US$5,640,000.
Hanjin Shenzhen’s position
In the Vicky 1, the claimant tanker owners had lost an actual fixture. Hanjin Shenzhen’s Owners argued that the principles from Vicky 1 only applied if the claimant ship owner had lost a secured fixture, not where there was no definite next business secured.
Their primary case was that the loss period should be split into two distinct periods: (i) the period during which the vessel was completely out of service, when repairs were being completed; and (ii) the period during which she performed the floating storage charter. On that basis, Hanjin Shenzhen argued that whilst they were liable in damages for lost income for approximately US$800,000 for period (i) during the dry docking, by the time of the floating storage charter being entered into after dry docking the spot market had in fact fallen such that no damages were recoverable for period (ii) as the rates achieved under the floating storage business successfully mitigated Astipalaia’s loss.
Hanjin Shenzhen interests also opposed the “time equalisation method” of seeking to model hypothetical voyages on the basis that it was too speculative to seek to calculate when the vessel might have been back in the AG after the first hypothetical voyage, and what the spot rate might have been at that time for the second hypothetical voyage.
During proceedings it was accepted by both experts that VLCCs operate in a well-defined and straightforward trading pattern. The largest loading area (around 72% of all VLCC cargoes) is the AG followed by West Africa, with a limited number of cargoes loading in the Caribbean or North Sea/Mediterranean. The Registrar accepted this evidence, and further evidence that of the 72% of cargoes lifted from the AG, around 70% of those cargoes are for Far East discharge. Accordingly, it could be established on the balance of probabilities what sort of business the vessel most likely would/could have achieved during the total detention period.
The Admiralty Court decision
The Registrar considered and analysed various leading cases, including The Argentino (1888) 13 PD 191 (C/A), 14 App Cas 519 (H/L), The Soya [1956] 1 WLR 714 (C/A) and The Vicky 1 [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 45 (C/A).
Having done so, the Registrar accepted Astipalaia’s approach to assessing damages. The court upheld Astipalaia’s argument that the detention period should include not only the repair period but also the additional period the vessel needed to obtain reinstatement of oil major approvals before returning to her normal employment, and that this detention period should be taken as a single period finishing on 29 June 2008, not broken into two parts. The arguments on behalf of Hanjin Shenzhen that there were principles of law curtailing or precluding such an assessment were rejected.
On the basis of the expert evidence before him, the Registrar assessed damages in the total sum of approximately US$ 4,960,000 (a loss of earnings of US$ 9,860,000 less US$ 4,900,000) earned during the floating storage contract.
Comment
This Judgment confirms that an owner can claim damages not just for the immediate loss of use of the vessel during the period of repairs but also for further knock-on effects to the vessel’s ability to return to normal trading, provided of course that such knock-on effects are not too remote or unforeseeable and that the loss can be proven by evidence.
The Judgment also confirms that there is no set rule as to the recoverability of damages for loss of use, and that such recovery is not dependent on proof of a specific lost fixture, nor (if such a fixture is established) that damages are limited to that one fixture but no more.
While there is no set methodology for calculating loss of profits, the methodologies used in earlier cases may be adapted to suit the facts of each case. The principles applied in this case were ultimately the same as those applied in The Vicky 1 and can be said to represent a recognised and well principled approach to modelling a vessel’s likely earnings over a given period which properly takes into account the relevant market position as at the time the hypothetical voyages would have been fixed.
It should be noted, however, that proving one’s loss may be more difficult in other trades. The VLCC trade is sufficiently well established and ‘predictable’, with enough data published, to allow a meaningful expert analysis of what the vessel could have earned. It would be more difficult to undertake the same exercise for ships with a more varied and unpredictable trading pattern.
Source: Ince & Co / Hellenic Shipping News
If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.
|
|
Monday, 12 May 14
TAIPOWER TO IMPORT AROUND 1 MMT OF SUB-BITUMINOUS COAL DURING AUGUST 2014 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2014
COALspot.com - Taiwan Power Company intends to procure 1.050 million tons of sub-bituminous coal for Taipower thermal power plant through open t ...
Monday, 12 May 14
DRY BULK MARKET IS STILL STRUGGLING TO FIND FIRM FOOTING
COALspot.com: The freight market continued to be weak and the BDI closed slightly lower at 997 points or fell 1.96 pct week on week. The cape in ...
Friday, 09 May 14
RBCT SHIPPED 5.4 MMT OF COAL IN APRIL
COALspot.com: South Africa's Richards Bay Coal Terminal (RBCT) the single largest coal export terminal in the world, shipped 5.45 million to ...
Friday, 09 May 14
DRY BULK MARKET: BANKRUPTCY TONNAGE UNLEASHED
Drewry’s latest Dry Bulk Forecaster saw freight rates on most routes declined in 2014’s first quarter as the previous quarter’ ...
Friday, 09 May 14
UNITED STATES COAL PRODUCTION SLIGHTLY SLIDES TO 82.4 MMST IN APRIL
COALspot.com – United States the world's second largest coal producer, produced approximately 18.8 million short tons (mmst) of coal i ...
|
|
|
Showing 3711 to 3715 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Planning Commission, India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Australian Coal Association
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Parliament of New Zealand
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
