Tuesday, January 31, 2023
Market-Reporter
  • Home
  • Markets
    • U.S. Markets
    • Canada
    • Europe & Middle East
    • Emerging Markets
    • Asia
    • Latin America
  • Investing
    • Stocks
    • IPOs
    • Mutual Funds
    • ETFs
    • Bonds
    • Commodities
    • Currencies
    • Cryptocurrencies
  • Economy & Politics
    • Personal Finance
    • Spending & Saving
    • Retirement
    • Real Estate
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Markets
    • U.S. Markets
    • Canada
    • Europe & Middle East
    • Emerging Markets
    • Asia
    • Latin America
  • Investing
    • Stocks
    • IPOs
    • Mutual Funds
    • ETFs
    • Bonds
    • Commodities
    • Currencies
    • Cryptocurrencies
  • Economy & Politics
    • Personal Finance
    • Spending & Saving
    • Retirement
    • Real Estate
No Result
View All Result
Market-Reporter
No Result
View All Result
Home Commodities

MAC Clauses – Are they required in commodity contracts?

MtR by MtR
June 15, 2021
in Commodities
0


Travelport Limited v WEX Inc1 is the first reported decision of a material adverse event clause triggered by the COVID pandemic. With the major downturn in international business following the pandemic, parties have turned their attention to material adverse change (“MAC”) or material adverse event (“MAE”) clauses to terminate problematic agreements.

Traditionally MAC/MAE clauses have been found in financing agreements, but they are also used extensively in SPAs for assets and businesses (as in Travelport) and are attractive clauses where there is a time lag between the agreement itself and completion. They also appear in particular long-term commodity contracts, most likely at the request of the financial institutions supporting the trades, although many spot commodity contracts also now include a form of a MAC/MAE clause. The question then posed by those dealing with commodity contracts is whether MAC/MAE clauses are really required, and if they are, should they come with a “handle with care!” health-warning?

Interpretation of MAC/MAE clauses

MAC/MAE clauses come in different forms. In Travelport the MAE was complex. It was taken from a US law precedent and contained (a) the definition of an MAE, (b) a “carve-out” to that definition which, if applicable, excluded reliance on the clause, and (c) an exception to the carve-out which, if applicable, brought the clause back into play. While the usual position is for the burden of proof to rest with the party seeking to rely on the clause, in Travelport the clause was more complex. There, the buyer was relying on the MAC/MAE clause, the seller then had the burden of proving that the relevant event fell within the carve-out to a defined MAE, following which the buyer (who was relying on the MAE clause) had the burden of proving that the carve-out exception applied. Clarity in the drafting is a key element as we shall see.

Nothing prevents the parties from creating their own definition of what constitutes a MAC/MAE. An example from the commodity market is the Standard Coal Trading Agreement (“SCoTA”) which defines the MAC but provides (in the SCoTA Master Agreement) the ability of parties to elect an amendment to that definition through a “Definition Replacement” and any “Additional Events” from a selection of four options.

Although each MAC/MAE clause must be looked at individually, Travelport and an earlier decision of Grupo Hotelro Urvasco SA v Carey Value Added S,2 together provide useful commentary on the principles of interpretation of MAC/MAE clauses:

  1. The burden of proving a MAC/MAE is on the party relying upon the clause and identifying the party can be straightforward in the simpler MAC/MAE clauses. In a financing document it would invariably be the lender. In SCoTA it is the party relying upon the clause looking to terminate the agreement. In Travelport, where the clause was complex, it was the buyer (seeking to rely upon the original MAC/MAE definition, but also the carve-out exception in order to rely on the MAE clause).
  2. The normal rules of interpretation of contract apply and there is no special principle of contractual interpretation such as the contra proferentem rule.
  3. What is the precise wording of the clause?

3.1 What is meant by “material”, “adverse”, “change” or “effect”?

3.2 On whom does the burden lie?

3.3 How are those comparators and qualifications that need to be satisfied as part of the MAC/MAE defined and how is this to be assessed?

3.4 Over what period is the alleged MAC/MAE to have occurred and what evidence is required to prove it?

3.5 What is the decision making process and what does the MAC/MAE clause require a party to do before any rights triggered by a MAC/MAE clause can be exercised? This depends on the wording of the clause, which may introduce an element of discretion and decision-making.

For example, SCoTA only permits reliance on the clause where there is “a material adverse change … so that in the reasonable opinion of the other Party (exercising good faith) the ability of the Party … to perform its obligations … becomes materially impaired“. Care is required as this MAC/MAE clause introduces requirements of “discretion” and “good faith” as part of the decision making process before a party can rely upon it. See also Torre Asset Funding Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland3 and Cukurova Finance International v Alfa Telecom Turkey.4

The risk is always that if a party wrongfully terminates a contract relying on a MAC/MAE clause then unless otherwise provided for in the agreement, that party could be treated as in repudiatory breach of contract and be liable in damages to its counterparty.

So are MAC/MAE clauses necessary in commodity contracts?

We think not. The importance of a MAC/MAE clause in a contract to sell or buy a commodity with a market value is somewhat less than in pure financial and derivative contracts, and in cases like Travelport, which involved a large financial commitment to purchase a large illiquid asset such as a business, for the following reasons:

  • Whilst there are material changes or events that meet the definition in a MAC/MAE and affect a buyer or seller’s financial status, they may not adversely affect the ability of either party to perform the contract in terms of delivering and taking delivery of the commodity.
  • Although the commodity’s market value may change, that is an inherent market risk and not a ground to rely upon a MAC/MAE clause. The position may be different if a buyer was obligated to make a pre-payment to a seller and where such a “change” or “event” would affect the ability of a seller to repay the pre-payment and/or produce and deliver the commodity against which the pre-payment was made. In short, it is not the status of business which necessarily counts, but the ability to deliver and take delivery and pay for the commodity.
  • Using a MAC/MAE clause in addressing problems under a commodity contract is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The issues faced are questions of failing to deliver/take delivery, quality, force majeure, price and payment, and rejection. All these issues are frequently addressed by the common law or Sale of Goods Act 1979. Questions of payment are addressed by an action for damages, and/or a claim on the price.
  • Perhaps most significantly, where questions of insolvency of a seller or buyer are concerned, while insolvency itself is not a ground for treating a counterparty as being in repudiatory breach of a contract (unless of course the contract provides otherwise), the impact of an insolvency may permit a seller or buyer to exercise remedies; failure by a buyer to open a letter of credit may be treated as a repudiatory breach, for example.
  • Insolvency of the buyer can also be addressed via the statutory remedies under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (i.e. stoppage in transit, lien on goods, right of resale). There is the fact that an unpaid seller may still be the lawful holder of the bill of lading and entitled to constructive possession of a cargo not yet delivered and discharged or, if discharged, discharged and delivered to the wrong party.
  • The contract may provide for other remedies where a seller or buyer is in default of contract, including a MAC/MAE if so defined. This may include the right to suspend deliveries or to take delivery.

Finally, a cautionary note. A buyer wishing to rely upon a MAC/MAE clause but where the commodity can still be delivered or delivery taken needs to consider whether doing so causes more of an impediment to performance than would otherwise be the case.



Source link

Related articles

Record outflows from commodity ETPs obscure long-term demand

August 10, 2022

Pacific Trader: B2Gold bucks the commodity slump

August 9, 2022

Related Posts

Record outflows from commodity ETPs obscure long-term demand

by MtR
August 10, 2022
0

Latest news on ETFsVisit our ETF Hub to find out more and to explore our in-depth data and comparison toolsInvestors...

Pacific Trader: B2Gold bucks the commodity slump

by MtR
August 9, 2022
0

Credit: B2Gold Corp. Hauling ore at B2Gold's Otjikoto Mine in Namibia And unlike its peers, the Vancouver company pays a...

Ford raises prices of electric F-150 pickup amid high commodity costs

by MtR
August 9, 2022
0

The all-electric Ford F-150 Lightning pickup truck is unveiled at the company's world headquarters in Dearborn, Michigan, U.S., May 19,...

Commodity Market: Gold price surge marginally

by MtR
August 9, 2022
0

Mumbai: Price of gold edged higher marginally in the commodity market. Sovereign gold is trading at Rs 38,240, higher by...

Japan Hands over Emergency Medicines and Commodities for Pregnant Women and Adolescent Girls though the Project “PROMISES” under the partnership with UNFPA – Sri Lanka

by MtR
August 9, 2022
0

On 8 August, Ambassador of Japan to Sri Lanka, H. E. Mr. MIZUKOSHI Hideaki handed over essential pharmaceuticals for women...

Load More
  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

Bank of England tells ministers to intervene on digital currency ‘programming’

June 21, 2021

Tips for checking smoke alarms during daylight saving time

March 12, 2022

GLOBAL MARKETS-U.S. stocks follow Europe up; Treasury yields rise, dollar firm

July 9, 2021

What will Durham County education bonds pay for? A full list

July 8, 2022
African currencies week ahead: Zambia's kwacha seen on back foot, Kenyan shilling up – Business Recorder

African currencies week ahead: Zambia's kwacha seen on back foot, Kenyan shilling up – Business Recorder

0
Maxum Foods releases Global Dairy Commodity Update for June

Maxum Foods releases Global Dairy Commodity Update for June

0
Letter: Perpetual bonds can help states fight hunger

Letter: Perpetual bonds can help states fight hunger

0
United Kingdom ETFs Are Riding the Re-Opening Momentum

United Kingdom ETFs Are Riding the Re-Opening Momentum

0

Investment in overseas real estate surges : The DONG-A ILBO

August 11, 2022

U.S. inflation CPI report, Wall Street, currencies

August 10, 2022

Alberta oil production set new record in first half of 2022

August 10, 2022

Industrial Lubricants Market to Reach $71 Billion by 2027.

August 10, 2022

Recent News

Investment in overseas real estate surges : The DONG-A ILBO

August 11, 2022

U.S. inflation CPI report, Wall Street, currencies

August 10, 2022

Alberta oil production set new record in first half of 2022

August 10, 2022

Categories

  • Asia
  • Bonds
  • Canada
  • Commodities
  • Cryptocurrencies
  • Currencies
  • Emerging Markets
  • ETFs
  • Europe & Middle East
  • IPOs
  • Latin America
  • Mutual Funds
  • Personal Finance
  • Real Estate
  • Retirement
  • Spending & Saving
  • Stocks
  • U.S. Markets
  • Privacy & Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise with us

© 2021 Copyright Market-Reporter

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Markets
    • U.S. Markets
    • Canada
    • Europe & Middle East
    • Emerging Markets
    • Asia
    • Latin America
  • Investing
    • Stocks
    • IPOs
    • Mutual Funds
    • ETFs
    • Bonds
    • Commodities
    • Currencies
    • Cryptocurrencies
  • Economy & Politics
    • Personal Finance
    • Spending & Saving
    • Retirement
    • Real Estate

© 2021 Copyright Market-Reporter