COALspot.com keeps you connected across the coal world
  • OCTOBER 2020 INDONESIAN COAL PRICE REFERENCE FOR EXPORTS AND DOMESTIC BUYERS INCLUDING POWER PRODUCERS FIXED AT US$ 51.00 A TON

Submit Your Articles
We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining, shipping, etc.

To Submit your article please click here.

International Energy Events


WTI Crude Oil

BRENT Crude Oil

Search News
Latest CoalNews Headlines
Tuesday, 21 April 20
COVID-19: CHARTERPARTY MATTERS FOR SHIPOWNERS - SKULD
SkuldKNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE

Whilst the plight of cruise ships, stranded off shore with sick passengers and crew, may be dominating media headlines, the current COVID-19 pandemic is having a significant effect on the shipping industry as a whole. This article first explores owners’ rights to refuse to call at a port which is affected by the virus, before examining the rights, obligations and liabilities of owners under charterparties in the context of delays at loading and discharging ports.
 
Can owners refuse to comply with charterers’ orders?
Owners may be concerned that proceeding to a particular port could expose the crew to COVID-19, thereby endangering their health. The crew themselves may express concerns and indeed there have been recent reports in the industry press of a crew refusing to berth and allow stevedores on board the ship due to their fears of coming into contact with the virus.
 
However, owners are only likely to be able to refuse to proceed if there is a specific clause in the charterparty entitling them to do so, or if they can show that any safe port warranty has been breached.
 
Under English law, a port is considered unsafe (and the safe port warranty breached) if it a ship is unable to reach it, use it and return from it without, in the absence of some abnormal occurrence, being exposed to danger which cannot be avoided by good navigation and seamanship. An owner may wish to argue that a port is unsafe because of the danger to the health of the crew, or because of the risk of the vessel being quarantined or delayed after visiting that port.
 
Any dispute about the safety of the port is likely to be highly fact specific, including factors such as the spread of the virus in the port/country in question and the measures which the port have (or the crew can) put in place to limit contact between the crew and shore personnel. In most cases (at least based on the situations we have seen to date), it will be difficult to establish that a port is unsafe within the legal definition. Crews are generally able to take sufficient steps to limit their interaction with shore personnel and any delays which are incurred due to complying with quarantine restrictions are unlikely to be sufficiently lengthy to be considered a danger to the ship’s free movement. Accordingly, refusing to proceed to a particular port is likely to be risky and could expose owners to substantial claims from charterers for delays and losses.
 
We consider below the extent to which, if owners agree to comply with charterers’ orders, any adverse consequences of so doing – including, in particular, delays and additional port costs and expenses – are likely to be recoverable from charterers. In most cases, owners should be reluctant to refuse to comply with charterer’s voyage orders in the absence of a very real concern for the health and well-being of the crew.
 
BIMCO Infectious or Contagious Disease Clause
The position may be different if there is an express term in the charterparty which gives additional rights to owners. The most common clause in charterparties is BIMCO’s Infectious or Contagious Disease clause, with different versions applicable for time and voyage charterparties.
 
The essence of the clause is that it gives owners a right to leave, or refuse to proceed to, a port where there is a risk of exposure by the vessel to a “highly infectious or contagious disease that is seriously harmful to humans” or to a risk of quarantine or other restrictions being imposed in connection with the disease (an “affected area”). Charterers are required to provide alternative voyage orders and indemnify owners for additional costs or expenses incurred as a result of complying with or awaiting such orders. The vessel expressly remains on hire throughout. If the owners agree to proceed to an “affected area” within the meaning of the clause, the vessel will remain on hire at all times and charterers will be liable for delays or additional costs or liabilities arising.
 
The clause for use in voyage charterparties has a similar effect. However, owners are only entitled to refuse to proceed to a port which has become an affected area after the date of the charterparty: owners are expected to exercise their own due diligence in respect of the state of the contractually agreed ports when agreeing the fixture. If alternative voyage orders are issued, owners are entitled to recover additional expenses and freight. If owners agree to proceed to the affected area, charterers are responsible for additional costs arising and time lost counts as laytime or time on demurrage.
 
It is important to note that the BIMCO clauses have not yet been tested by any court or tribunal in the context of coronavirus. This means that, although BIMCO have clarified that they believe the clause could be triggered in respect of a port affected by COVID-19, there remains a risk that the scope of the clauses could be limited. For example a court could ultimately determine that there was no real risk of exposure to the crew due to measures put in place by a port to ensure minimal interaction between the crew and shore personnel. BIMCO suggest that, unless a public health authority has declared a port as a risk to visiting ships, it is unlikely to fall within the scope of the clause. Accordingly, even if a charterparty includes such a clause, shipowners should continue to exercise due diligence by informing themselves about the situation at individual ports and assessing the specific risks on a case by case basis.
 
Delays at port and force majeure
A number of ports have declared “force majeure” since their ability to operate has been affected by the spread of COVID-19. In particular, operations have been slowed due to restrictions affecting the free movement of the workforce and disruptions to the supply chain have affected the routine flow of cargo through the port. Such declarations may limit shipowners’ ability to take any action against the port authorities, but would not tend to affect liabilities between owners and charterers under their charterparties, which are private contractual arrangements and very often subject to English law.
 
Unlike certain civil law jurisdictions, English law does not recognise “force majeure” as a general legal concept. This means that a party to a contract subject to English law cannot simply declare that they are affected by circumstances of force majeure and are therefore relieved from their obligations. They can only do so if the contract or charterparty in question contains an express force majeure clause or other exclusion / exceptions clause which grants them such rights.
 
The force majeure clause will set out the specific circumstances in which it can be triggered and will identify the rights and obligations of both parties when force majeure circumstances are triggered. This may include rights of termination, or be limited to an exclusion of liability for delays and non-performance. In circumstances where charterers are claiming the protection of a force majeure clause, owners will likely want to ensure their charterparty includes a right to terminate after a certain period, so that they do not end up waiting indefinitely for charterers to perform, without being able to recover hire or demurrage for that period.
 
Frustration
If the charterparty becomes impossible to perform or performance has become radically different than the parties had anticipated due to circumstances unforeseen at the time of entering into the charterparty, it may be terminated automatically on the basis that it has been frustrated. Since any reduction or suspension of operations at a port can be expected to be temporary, it cannot be said that performance of a charterparty has become impossible – only that performance will be delayed.
 
In order for the charterparty to be frustrated, the delay would have to be such as would render performance radically different from that anticipated by the parties. At present, it seems unlikely that delays at a port would cause a time charter to be frustrated. Even in cases of a voyage charter or a time charter trip, the argument is likely to be difficult to make, but will depend on the particular circumstances in question, including the length of any delays, the term of the charterparty, and the information available to the parties when the charterparty was entered into.
 
Who is liable for delays?
If it has been established that the charterer has no right to terminate the charterparty on the grounds of force majeure and it has not been frustrated, then the parties will want to know who bears the liability for delays encountered and additional costs incurred. This will ultimately depend on (i) the factual circumstances / cause of the delays and (ii) the charterparty wording.
 
In the absence of express wording, it is likely that delays at ports due to shortage of workers, unavailability of cargo or similar shore-side delays will be for charterers’ account. In a time charter context, such events would not tend to fall within the off hire provision, provided the vessel remains fully working and ready to carry out normal operations. In a voyage charter, provided the vessel had been able to tender NOR, such events are unlikely to fall within the exceptions to laytime, so that laytime will continue to run and demurrage to accrue, subject to any other interruptions or exceptions which may take effect (e.g. weather-related interruptions).
 
The position may be different if the delays affect the vessel and/or crew, for example, where there is an outbreak or occurrence of COVID-19 on board a ship. If the crew members are affected in sufficient numbers, the vessel could be off hire due to deficiency of men. Deviations or delays may be caused by the need to disembark crew for medical treatment, and such delays would tend to be for the owners’ account in the first instance. A suspected or established case is likely to cause the vessel to be quarantined upon arrival at the next port. Indeed, some ports have imposed quarantine requirements on vessels arriving from specific named ports, where there has been a high prevalence of COVID-19 infections, even where there is no indication that the crew is affected. These situations are more complex and will certainly depend on the specific wording of the charterparty and the off hire clause in particular. Under a voyage charter, it will be necessary to examine the charterparty terms as to when the vessel may tender NOR and exceptions / interruptions to laytime, which will determine whether laytime runs and demurrage accrues. If the charterparty includes the relevant BIMCO clause, or similar wording, the allocation of liability for delays and additional costs which may arise should be more easily determined.
 
In the absence of the BIMCO clause, owners of a time-chartered vessel may be able to argue that any delays or additional costs arising due to quarantine restrictions or crew infection following a call at a port affected by COVID-19 are for charterers’ account on the basis of ‘the implied indemnity.’ The general principle of the implied indemnity is that losses suffered by owners due to their compliance with charterers’ employment orders ought to be indemnified by charterers. However, this argument has yet to be tested in the context of this pandemic and would depend upon a court / tribunal’s view of how the parties intended to allocate risk and liability, taking into account both the express wording of the charterparty and the factual information available to the parties at the time of entering into the fixture. Owners would therefore be better protected by incorporating express wording into their charterparties, such as the BIMCO clauses discussed above.
Source: Skuld


If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.

Recent News

Wednesday, 21 October 20
INDIA: THE COMMERCIALISATION OF COAL BLOCKS WILL BENEFIT THE ECONOMY - HINDU BUSINESS LINE
As the government of India receives 76 bids for 23 coal mines against the 38 up on auction, what does this commercialisation of coal block allocati ...


Wednesday, 21 October 20
MARKET INSIGHT - INTERMODAL
The second wave of COVID-19 is now a reality; offices are closing again, and stricter rules and regulations are being implemented in public spaces. ...


Tuesday, 20 October 20
CHINA TAIYUAN COAL TRANSACTION PRICE INDEX UP 0.82 PCT - XINHUA
China Taiyuan coal transaction price index stood at 127.49 points Monday, up 0.82 percent week on week.   The index, released by China ...


Tuesday, 20 October 20
BIMCO 'SHIPLEASE' TERM SHEET - WATSON FARLEY & WILLIAMS
KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE The ever-growing importance of sale and leaseback transactions as an alternative to financing ships by way of loan, makes ...


Friday, 16 October 20
KOMIPO ON BEHALF OF K GENCO'S INVITED BIDS FOR TOTAL 715,000 MT MIN. 5,700 NAR COAL FOR DECEMBER
COALspot.com: Korea Midland Power Co., Ltd (KOMIPO) on behalf of EWP, KOSPO, KOSEP and KOWEPO has issued an international tender for total 715,000& ...


   1 2 3 4 5   
Showing 6 to 10 news of total 6119
News by Category
Popular News
 
Total Members : 27,135
Member
Panelist
User ID
Password
Remember Me
By logging on you accept our TERMS OF USE.
Free
Register
Forgot Password
 
Our Members Are From ...

  • Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
  • NALCO India
  • Sucofindo - Indonesia
  • Thiess Contractors Indonesia
  • Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
  • Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
  • Adaro Indonesia
  • Romanian Commodities Exchange
  • Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
  • Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
  • Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
  • Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
  • Independent Power Producers Association of India
  • Thomson Reuters GRC
  • Mitra SK Pvt Ltd - India
  • TGV SRAAC LIMITED, India
  • Inco-Indonesia
  • Adani Power Ltd - India
  • TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
  • Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
  • Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
  • Thriveni
  • OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
  • Ministry of Transport, Egypt
  • Videocon Industries ltd - India
  • Australian Coal Association
  • Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
  • ACC Limited - India
  • Sical Logistics Limited - India
  • Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
  • Chamber of Mines of South Africa
  • Mitsui
  • Argus Media - Singapore
  • Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
  • Coal and Oil Company - UAE
  • New Zealand Coal & Carbon
  • Runge Indonesia
  • Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
  • Eastern Energy - Thailand
  • Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
  • Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
  • Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
  • Deloitte Consulting - India
  • Indian School of Mines
  • PowerSource Philippines DevCo
  • Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
  • International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
  • ING Bank NV - Singapore
  • Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
  • Coal India Limited
  • Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
  • Interocean Group of Companies - India
  • PTC India Limited - India
  • Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
  • Petrosea - Indonesia
  • World Coal - UK
  • Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
  • ICICI Bank Limited - India
  • UBS Singapore
  • KPCL - India
  • Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
  • Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
  • Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
  • KPMG - USA
  • Georgia Ports Authority, United States
  • Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
  • JPMorgan - India
  • Total Coal South Africa
  • Japan Coal Energy Center
  • Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
  • Fearnleys - India
  • Maybank - Singapore
  • Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
  • Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
  • DBS Bank - Singapore
  • PLN - Indonesia
  • Berau Coal - Indonesia
  • Trasteel International SA, Italy
  • Russian Coal LLC
  • Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
  • Bank of China, Malaysia
  • Coaltrans Conferences
  • White Energy Company Limited
  • Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
  • Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
  • Indika Energy - Indonesia
  • Energy Development Corp, Philippines
  • Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
  • Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
  • The India Cements Ltd
  • Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
  • MEC Coal - Indonesia
  • Malabar Cements Ltd - India
  • Cardiff University - UK
  • Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
  • PLN Batubara - Indonesia
  • Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
  • Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
  • Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
  • AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
  • Credit Suisse - India
  • GMR Energy Limited - India
  • Vale Mozambique
  • Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
  • UOB Asia (HK) Ltd
  • Marubeni Corporation - India
  • Shenhua Group - China
  • Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
  • Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
  • Xstrata Coal
  • IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
  • Inspectorate - India
  • Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
  • Asian Development Bank
  • Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
  • Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
  • Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
  • TANGEDCO India
  • Central Java Power - Indonesia
  • Bhatia International Limited - India
  • The Treasury - Australian Government
  • Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
  • Noble Europe Ltd - UK
  • Edison Trading Spa - Italy
  • GNFC Limited - India
  • Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
  • Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
  • MS Steel International - UAE
  • San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
  • Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
  • Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
  • Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
  • Clarksons - UK
  • Reliance Power - India
  • ASAPP Information Group - India
  • Platts
  • Eastern Coal Council - USA
  • J M Baxi & Co - India
  • Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
  • Kobe Steel Ltd - Japan
  • Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
  • Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
  • Geoservices-GeoAssay Lab
  • Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
  • Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
  • Mitsubishi Corporation
  • Gresik Semen - Indonesia
  • Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
  • Minerals Council of Australia
  • Panama Canal Authority
  • Bangladesh Power Developement Board
  • Glencore India Pvt. Ltd
  • Coeclerici Indonesia
  • Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
  • Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
  • Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
  • Idemitsu - Japan
  • U S Energy Resources
  • Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
  • Thai Mozambique Logistica
  • Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
  • CNBM International Corporation - China
  • Samsung - South Korea
  • Renaissance Capital - South Africa
  • Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
  • VISA Power Limited - India
  • Lafarge - France
  • Indian Oil Corporation Limited
  • Indonesian Coal Mining Association
  • Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
  • Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
  • Qatrana Cement - Jordan
  • Siam City Cement - Thailand
  • Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
  • Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
  • Medco Energi Mining Internasional
  • Petron Corporation, Philippines
  • Cement Manufacturers Association - India
  • Indorama - Singapore
  • Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
  • CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
  • Maruti Cements - India
  • Merrill Lynch Bank
  • LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
  • Xindia Steels Limited - India
  • Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
  • Platou - Singapore
  • Coal Orbis AG
  • Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd.
  • TNPL - India
  • Freeport Indonesia
  • Economic Council, Georgia
  • bp singapore
  • Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
  • NTPC Limited - India
  • Cargill India Pvt Ltd
  • Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
  • Tata Power - India
  • Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
  • SMG Consultants - Indonesia
  • IMC Shipping - Singapore
  • KOWEPO - South Korea
  • Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
  • Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
  • Pinang Coal Indonesia
  • Carbofer General Trading SA - India
  • Barclays Capital - USA
  • London Commodity Brokers - England
  • Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
  • Star Paper Mills Limited - India
  • GB Group - China
  • Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
  • Commonwealth Bank - Australia
  • OCBC - Singapore
  • IOL Indonesia
  • Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
  • Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
  • KEPCO - South Korea
  • Baramulti Group, Indonesia
  • Anglo American - United Kingdom
  • Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
  • BNP Paribas - Singapore
  • Vitol - Bahrain
  • Vedanta Resources Plc - India
  • Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
  • Mercator Lines Limited - India
  • The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
  • GHCL Limited - India
  • globalCOAL - UK
  • CCIC - Indonesia
  • Surastha Cement
  • CoalTek, United States
  • World Bank
  • Dalmia Cement Bharat India
  • Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
  • Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
  • Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
  • Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
  • SMC Global Power, Philippines
  • The University of Queensland
  • Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
  • Parliament of New Zealand
  • APGENCO India
  • Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
  • Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
  • Core Mineral Indonesia
  • Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
  • PetroVietnam
  • McKinsey & Co - India
  • Latin American Coal - Colombia
  • ETA - Dubai
  • Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
  • IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
  • Enel Italy
  • Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
  • ANZ Bank - Australia
  • Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
  • Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
  • Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
  • SASOL - South Africa
  • Singapore Mercantile Exchange
  • Bangkok Bank PCL
  • Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
  • Posco Energy - South Korea
  • Permata Bank - Indonesia
  • Infraline Energy - India
  • Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
  • Ince & co LLP
  • Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
  • Ministry of Mines - Canada
  • Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
  • SRK Consulting
  • Shree Cement - India
  • Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
  • JPower - Japan
  • Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
  • Wilmar Investment Holdings
  • Jatenergy - Australia
  • Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
  • GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
  • Bhushan Steel Limited - India
  • CESC Limited - India
  • Arutmin Indonesia
  • SGS (Thailand) Limited
  • Indogreen Group - Indonesia
  • Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
  • Malco - India
  • IBC Asia (S) Pte Ltd
  • TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
  • PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
  • South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
  • Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
  • Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
  • Thermax Limited - India
  • Parry Sugars Refinery, India
  • Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
  • GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
  • Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
  • Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
  • Mechel - Russia
  • Cebu Energy, Philippines
  • Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
  • European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
  • Indonesia Power. PT
  • Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
  • Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
  • Maersk Broker
  • Heidelberg Cement - Germany
  • Arch Coal - USA
  • Agrawal Coal Company - India
  • Peabody Energy - USA
  • Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
  • Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
  • Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
  • Tamil Nadu electricity Board
  • Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
  • RBS Sempra - UK
  • Tanito Harum - Indonesia
  • Sojitz Corporation - Japan
  • TRAFIGURA, South Korea
  • Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
  • Asia Cement - Taiwan
  • BRS Brokers - Singapore
  • Moodys - Singapore
  • Mjunction Services Limited - India
  • Humpuss - Indonesia
  • Thailand Anthracite
  • PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
  • Planning Commission, India
  • Gupta Coal India Ltd
  • Deutsche Bank - India
  • McConnell Dowell - Australia
  • India Bulls Power Limited - India
  • Goldman Sachs - Singapore
  • Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
  • Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
  • Bank of America
  • GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
  • Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
  • EMO - The Netherlands
  • Central Electricity Authority - India
  • Aditya Birla Group - India
  • HSBC - Hong Kong
  • Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
  • EIA - United States
  • Rudhra Energy - India
  • SUEK AG - Indonesia
  • WorleyParsons
  • Britmindo - Indonesia
  • Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
  • SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
  • Cosco
  • Cemex - Philippines