CE Energy DMCC v Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar

CE Energy DMCC v Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar

The guarantee is a contract of suretyship, not a demand guarantee, but does not require adjudication of UOG's liability before Mr Bashar's obligation arises. UOG's admissions in the payment agreement are contractually binding and conclusively determine liability, binding Mr Bashar as guarantor. The payment date under the new spot contract satisfies section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act, entitling CEE to claim the price despite retention of title. CEE's allocation of payments was rational and consistent with the agreement. Defences raised by UOG and Mr Bashar have no realistic prospect of success.

Parties
Claimant: CE Energy DMCC; Defendant: Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar; Defendant: Ultimate OIL & GAS DMCC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for claimant; application to amend defence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Guarantee Liability, Contractual Estoppel, Sale of Goods Act Section 49, Payment Allocation, Summary Judgment, Retention of Title, Demurrage, Interest, Arbitration Agreements
Contract Law Commercial Law Sale of Goods Arbitration Guarantee Liability Contractual Estoppel Sale of Goods Act Section 49 Payment Allocation +5 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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CE Energy DMCC

Claimant

Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar

Defendant

Ultimate OIL & GAS DMCC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Nature of guarantee: demand or suretyship
  2. 2 Binding effect of admissions in payment agreement
  3. 3 Right to claim price under Sale of Goods Act section 49

Ratio Decidendi

The guarantee is a contract of suretyship, not a demand guarantee, but does not require adjudication of UOG's liability before Mr Bashar's obligation arises. UOG's admissions in the payment agreement are contractually binding and conclusively determine liability, binding Mr Bashar as guarantor. The payment date under the new spot contract satisfies section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act, entitling CEE to claim the price despite retention of title. CEE's allocation of payments was rational and consistent with the agreement. Defences raised by UOG and Mr Bashar have no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for claimant; application to amend defence dismissed.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for CE Energy DMCC against Alhaji Abdulrahman Musa Bashar under the personal guarantee for sums due.
  • Summary judgment entered for CE Energy DMCC against Ultimate OIL & GAS DMCC for price due under new spot contract.