CH Offshore Ltd v PDV Marina SA & Ors [2015] EWHC 595 (Comm) (12 March 2015)

CH Offshore Ltd v PDV Marina SA & Ors [2015] EWHC 595 (Comm) (12 March 2015)

Petroleo is not a necessary or proper party to the main action because the claims arise under different contracts, involve different issues, and are not closely bound up. The Services Contract contains a valid and operable exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the courts of Cumana, Venezuela, which covers the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 595 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: CH Offshore Limited; First Defendant: PDV Marina SA; Second Defendant: Astilleros de Venezuela CA (Astivenca); Third Party: PDVSA Petroleo SA (Petroleo)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction (part 20 Claim) / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application granted. Service of the Part 20 Claim Form and Particulars of Additional Claim on Petroleo set aside.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Forum Non Conveniens, Third Party Claims, Contract Interpretation
Civil Procedure Private International Law Commercial Law Jurisdiction Service Out of Jurisdiction Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Forum Non Conveniens Third Party Claims +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CH Offshore Limited

Claimant

PDV Marina SA

First Defendant

Astilleros de Venezuela CA (Astivenca)

Second Defendant

PDVSA Petroleo SA (Petroleo)

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction (part 20 Claim) / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Petroleo is a necessary or proper party to the main action for the purposes of CPR 6.36 and Practice Direction 6B para 3.1(4)
  2. 2 Whether the English court is the proper place to bring the claim under CPR 6.37(3)
  3. 3 Whether the exclusive jurisdiction clause in the Services Contract is valid and operable to require litigation in Venezuela

Ratio Decidendi

Petroleo is not a necessary or proper party to the main action because the claims arise under different contracts, involve different issues, and are not closely bound up. The Services Contract contains a valid and operable exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the courts of Cumana, Venezuela, which covers the dispute. There are no strong reasons to override the parties' contractual choice of forum. England and Wales is not the proper place to bring the claim.

Court Disposition

Application granted. Service of the Part 20 Claim Form and Particulars of Additional Claim on Petroleo set aside.

Orders

  • Service of the Part 20 Claim Form and Particulars of Additional Claim on Petroleo is set aside.
  • Parties to agree consequential matters including costs.