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 February 19
THE BDI HAS EASED BACK TO 645 BP, ITS LOWEST LEVEL SINCE AUGUST 2016 - ALLIED
The dry bulk sector is in the doldrums, with most market participants seemingly left utterly perplexed, and simultaneously, in pursuit of any posit ...
Monday, 04 February 19
COAL STILL IN HIGH DEMAND GLOBALLY
Although the world is switching to renewable energy there is still a big demand for coal around the globe.
This is according to Cany ...
Friday, 01 February 19
ULTRAMAX WAS FIXED DELIVERY KALIMANTAN, FOR TRIP TO WEST COAST INDIA AT $7,000 - BALTIC BRIEFING
Capesize
The Vale dam tragedy sparked a sharp fall in rates across all regions even where tonnage remained tight. The potential loss of product ...
Friday, 01 February 19
SEMBCORP SELECTS NORDEN FOR LONG-TERM INDIAN CONTRACT
NORDEN A/S has signed a 10-year Panamax Contract of Affreightment (COA) with Indian utility firm Sembcorp Energy India Ltd.
From 1 A ...
Tuesday, 29 January 19
HARD COAL BEARS THE BRUNT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION GROWTH STRUCTURAL CHANGE AND EMPLOYMENT - VDKI
Press Release: Hard coal bears the brunt of the recommendations of the Commission Growth Structural change and employment.
In its fi ...
|
|
|
Showing 1476 to 1480 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- VISA Power Limited - India
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- The University of Queensland
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- White Energy Company Limited
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Planning Commission, India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Australian Coal Association
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
