Conocophillips Petroleum Company UK Ltd v v Snamprogetti Ltd & Anor

Conocophillips Petroleum Company UK Ltd v v Snamprogetti Ltd & Anor

Snamprogetti was in breach of contract in certain respects, including design errors relating to the HIPS, blowdown sequence, and other minor items. However, the principal claim for damages relating to vibration and the abandonment of the fuel gas compressor failed, as Snamprogetti met the required standard of care and the abandonment was not caused by its breach. Damages for consequential loss and mitigation (including Seafox costs) were contractually excluded. Only limited damages for specific proven breaches were awarded. Snamprogetti succeeded on its counterclaim for unpaid sums and a proportion of additional design hours, resulting in a net judgment in its favour.

Parties
Claimant: ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company UK Limited (formerly Phillips Petroleum Company United Kingdom Limited); First Defendant: Snamprogetti Limited; Second Defendant: Snamprogetti International S.A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/construction) / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim for substantial damages dismissed; limited damages awarded for minor breaches; counterclaim by Snamprogetti allowed; net judgment for Snamprogetti.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Professional Negligence, Standard of Care, Consequential Loss, Remedial Works, Design Defects
Contract Law Construction Law Engineering Law Breach of Contract Damages Professional Negligence Standard of Care Consequential Loss +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company UK Limited (formerly Phillips Petroleum Company United Kingdom Limited)

Claimant

Snamprogetti Limited

First Defendant

Snamprogetti International S.A.

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/construction) / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What was the contractual standard of care required of Snamprogetti?
  2. 2 Was Snamprogetti in breach of contract in its design and engineering services?
  3. 3 Are damages for consequential loss, including loss of revenue and mitigation costs, recoverable under the contract?

Ratio Decidendi

Snamprogetti was in breach of contract in certain respects, including design errors relating to the HIPS, blowdown sequence, and other minor items. However, the principal claim for damages relating to vibration and the abandonment of the fuel gas compressor failed, as Snamprogetti met the required standard of care and the abandonment was not caused by its breach. Damages for consequential loss and mitigation (including Seafox costs) were contractually excluded. Only limited damages for specific proven breaches were awarded. Snamprogetti succeeded on its counterclaim for unpaid sums and a proportion of additional design hours, resulting in a net judgment in its favour.

Court Disposition

Claim for substantial damages dismissed; limited damages awarded for minor breaches; counterclaim by Snamprogetti allowed; net judgment for Snamprogetti.

Orders

  • Claimant awarded £70,510 (72.66% of £97,052) for minor breaches.
  • Counterclaimant (Snamprogetti) awarded £250,455 for unpaid sums and additional design hours.