Pan Oceanic Chartering Inc v UNIPEC UK Co Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 2774 (Comm) (10 November 2016)

Pan Oceanic Chartering Inc v UNIPEC UK Co Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 2774 (Comm) (10 November 2016)

The court found that POC failed to prove that UHK's predominant motive in ceasing nominations was to deprive POC of commission, and that the cessation resulted from a legitimate change in business strategy. There was no enforceable implied in law promise breached by UHK, nor was there tortious interference by UUK or UHK. The claims failed on both law and facts.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2774 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Pan Oceanic Chartering Inc; First Defendant: UNIPEC UK Co. Limited; Second Defendant: UNIPEC Asia Co. Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim for Damages (contract/tort) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Brokerage Commission, Tortious Interference With Contractual Relations, Implied Terms, Applicable Law, Damages
Commercial Law Contract Law Tort Law Conflict of Laws Breach of Contract Brokerage Commission Tortious Interference With Contractual Relations Implied Terms +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pan Oceanic Chartering Inc

Claimant

UNIPEC UK Co. Limited

First Defendant

UNIPEC Asia Co. Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim for Damages (contract/tort) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UHK breached an implied in law promise under New Jersey law not to act to deprive POC of commission under the 2010 WAF COA
  2. 2 Whether UUK and UHK tortiously interfered with the brokerage agreement between POC and TI under New Jersey law
  3. 3 Whether there was an enforceable brokerage agreement between POC and TI for payment of commission

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that POC failed to prove that UHK's predominant motive in ceasing nominations was to deprive POC of commission, and that the cessation resulted from a legitimate change in business strategy. There was no enforceable implied in law promise breached by UHK, nor was there tortious interference by UUK or UHK. The claims failed on both law and facts.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed in its entirety
  • No order for damages or other relief in favour of the claimant