Conocophillips Petroleum Company UK Ltd v v Snamprogetti Ltd & Anor [2003] EWHC 223 (TCC) (02 October 2003)

Conocophillips Petroleum Company UK Ltd v v Snamprogetti Ltd & Anor [2003] EWHC 223 (TCC) (02 October 2003)

The damages claimed by Phillips for loss of production and revenue, including mitigation costs such as hiring Seafox, are excluded by the contract's consequential loss clause, and Snamprogetti's conduct did not amount to gross negligence. The compressor specification, while not ideal, did not breach the contractual standard required of a first-class contractor.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 223 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company UK Limited; First Defendant: Snamprogetti Limited; Second Defendant: Snamprogetti International S.A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Claim / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Professional Negligence, Consequential Loss, Engineering Standards
Contract Law Construction Law Engineering Law Breach of Contract Damages Professional Negligence Consequential Loss Engineering Standards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company UK Limited

Claimant

Snamprogetti Limited

First Defendant

Snamprogetti International S.A.

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Claim / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Snamprogetti breached its contractual obligations by specifying a fuel gas compressor that induced excessive vibration
  2. 2 Whether damages claimed by Phillips for loss of production and mitigation costs are recoverable under the contract
  3. 3 Whether Snamprogetti's conduct met the required standard of skill, care, and diligence

Ratio Decidendi

The damages claimed by Phillips for loss of production and revenue, including mitigation costs such as hiring Seafox, are excluded by the contract's consequential loss clause, and Snamprogetti's conduct did not amount to gross negligence. The compressor specification, while not ideal, did not breach the contractual standard required of a first-class contractor.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • No damages awarded to claimant
  • Costs to be determined separately