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.
|
|
Tuesday, 07 January 14
INDONESIA RAISES COAL PRICE THIS MONTH
COALspot.com - The Ministry of Energy & Mineral Resources of Indonesia has increased government declared coal bench mark price by US$ 1.59 / MT ...
Tuesday, 07 January 14
NEWCASTLE COAL TERMINAL'S COAL EXPORTS SLIDE TO 3.54 MMT W/E 30 DECEMBER 13
COALspot.com: In the week ended December 30, power plant and semi-soft coking coal shipments from the port of Newcastle in Queensland, totalled 3.54 ...
Tuesday, 07 January 14
US COAL OUTPUT SLIDES 9 PCT WEEK ON WEEK, EIA SAYS
COALspot.com – United States the world’s second largest coal producer, produced approximately 17.8 million short tons (mmst) of coal in ...
Monday, 06 January 14
ARGUS LAUNCHES SPOT CFR EAST COAST INDIA COAL ASSESSMENTS
COALspot.com: Global energy and commodity news and price reporting agency Argus has announced today that, the company has launched CFR coal assessme ...
Monday, 06 January 14
INDONESIAN COAL SWAPS SLIDE TO $ 61.25 FOR Q4' 14 DELIVERY
COALspot.com – Sub-Bit Indonesia coal swap (FOB) for average Q1’ 14 delivery lost $ 0.32 pmt month on month on Friday 3 January 2014. Th ...
|
|
|
Showing 3921 to 3925 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Australian Coal Association
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- The University of Queensland
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
|
| |
| |
|
