Petromec Inc v Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. Petrobras and others [electronic resource]
Petromec Inc v Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. Petrobras and others [electronic resource]
- 2007
[2007] EWCA Civ 1371, 21 December 2007. Examines the concept of the total loss global claim. A contract between the appellant (Petromec) and the respondent (Petrobras) was in the form of a supervision agreement for the upgrade of an oil rig vessel specified for use on the South Marlim field (original specification). Petrobras decided to use the platform in the Roncador field instead (amended specification), which required significantly different upgrading works. The parties agreed the basis of compensation by clause 12 of the supervision agreement, but had opposing methodologies for implementing the clause 12 assessment; Petromec's approach was a total loss global claim whereas Petrobas' approach required a detailed analysis of each of the alleged changes. The judge found that Petromec's methodology was not what the contract envisaged and the causal nexus between each instruction and the extra cost had to be proved ([2007]) EWHC 1589 (Comm)). Petromec appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed. Petromec's total loss claim failed because it made not attempt to establish the causal connection between the events and the costs claimed. Details were needed if the proceedings were to be fair.
PETROMEC INC V PETROLEO BRASILEIRO SA
International
[2007] EWCA Civ 1371, 21 December 2007. Examines the concept of the total loss global claim. A contract between the appellant (Petromec) and the respondent (Petrobras) was in the form of a supervision agreement for the upgrade of an oil rig vessel specified for use on the South Marlim field (original specification). Petrobras decided to use the platform in the Roncador field instead (amended specification), which required significantly different upgrading works. The parties agreed the basis of compensation by clause 12 of the supervision agreement, but had opposing methodologies for implementing the clause 12 assessment; Petromec's approach was a total loss global claim whereas Petrobas' approach required a detailed analysis of each of the alleged changes. The judge found that Petromec's methodology was not what the contract envisaged and the causal nexus between each instruction and the extra cost had to be proved ([2007]) EWHC 1589 (Comm)). Petromec appealed. "Held": appeal dismissed. Petromec's total loss claim failed because it made not attempt to establish the causal connection between the events and the costs claimed. Details were needed if the proceedings were to be fair.
PETROMEC INC V PETROLEO BRASILEIRO SA
International