CH Offshore Ltd v PDV Marina SA & Ors

CH Offshore Ltd v PDV Marina SA & Ors

Petroleo is not a necessary or proper party to the main action as the claims arise under different contracts and are not closely bound up by a common thread. Even if it were, 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 disregard the parties’ contractual choice of forum. England and Wales is not the proper place to bring the claim.

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 (jurisdictional Challenge) / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application allowed; service set aside
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses, Third Party Claims, Forum Non Conveniens
Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Commercial Law Jurisdiction Service Out of Jurisdiction Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Third Party Claims Forum Non Conveniens

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 19 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 (jurisdictional Challenge) / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Petroleo is a necessary or proper party to the main action for purposes of service out of jurisdiction under CPR 6.36 and Practice Direction 6B paragraph 3.1(4)
  2. 2 Whether England and Wales is the proper place to bring the claim under CPR 6.37(3)
  3. 3 Whether the exclusive jurisdiction clause in the Services Contract in favour of Venezuelan courts is valid and operable

Ratio Decidendi

Petroleo is not a necessary or proper party to the main action as the claims arise under different contracts and are not closely bound up by a common thread. Even if it were, 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 disregard the parties’ contractual choice of forum. England and Wales is not the proper place to bring the claim.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; service 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