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, 05 May 14
HUANENG CLEAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE HAS CONFIRMED TO SPEAK AT CCF2014
Press Release: Produced by CDMC Events, The 13th Clean Coal Forum 2014 will be held on June 12,13, 2014 in Beijing, China. We are glad to invite ...
Monday, 05 May 14
SUB BIT-FOB INDONESIA COAL SWAPS LOST GROUND LAST WEEK
COALspot.com: Indonesian coal swaps for average Q3’ 2014 lost on day, week and on month according to AsiaClear OTC coal swap's reports ...
Monday, 05 May 14
API 8 CFR SOUTH CHINA COAL SWAP FOR AVERAGE Q3 14 DELIVERIES: LOST 0.82% M-O-M
COALspot.com: API 8 CFR South China Coal swaps for average Q3 14 deliveries lost 0.82 percent month on month and closed at US$ 75.20 per mt as o ...
Sunday, 04 May 14
INDONESIA TO INDIA FREIGHT RATES ARE SHOWING POSITIVE TREND
COALspot.com: The freight market is seems to be some recovery as cape index has increased by 7.84 pct week on week. Cape index closed at 1829 po ...
Friday, 02 May 14
ADARO ENERGY STARTS YEAR 2014 WELL DESPITE CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS
COALspot.com: Adaro Energy, the second largest Indonesian coal miner's revenue increased 14% to US$ 845 million due to higher sales volume, ...
|
|
|
Showing 3721 to 3725 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- The University of Queensland
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- White Energy Company Limited
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
