OMV Petrom SA v Glencore International AG

OMV Petrom SA v Glencore International AG

Glencore knowingly supplied bespoke blends misrepresented as Iranian Heavy or GOSM, intending Petex, Rafirom, and banks to rely on false documents and pay contract prices; Petex was not complicit, and Rafirom relied and was induced by the representations. Under English and Romanian law, Petrom (as successor to Rafirom) is entitled to damages for deceit measured as price paid less actual value of blends, including a discount for uncertainty. Glencore's arguments on Petex's knowledge, spent representations, and limitation under Romanian law fail.

Parties
Claimant: OMV Petrom SA; Defendant: Glencore International AG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Fraud Claim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for claimant (Petrom) against defendant (Glencore) for deceit.
Legal Topics
Fraud, Deceit, Measure of Damages, Double Actionability, Conflict of Laws, Commission Agency, Misrepresentation, Limitation, Delict
Commercial Law Tort Law International Trade Agency Law Fraud Deceit Measure of Damages Double Actionability +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 7 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OMV Petrom SA

Claimant

Glencore International AG

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Fraud Claim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Glencore committed actionable deceit against Petrom/Rafirom under English and Romanian law
  2. 2 Whether Petex's knowledge or complicity bars Petrom's claim
  3. 3 Appropriate measure of damages for deceit

Ratio Decidendi

Glencore knowingly supplied bespoke blends misrepresented as Iranian Heavy or GOSM, intending Petex, Rafirom, and banks to rely on false documents and pay contract prices; Petex was not complicit, and Rafirom relied and was induced by the representations. Under English and Romanian law, Petrom (as successor to Rafirom) is entitled to damages for deceit measured as price paid less actual value of blends, including a discount for uncertainty. Glencore's arguments on Petex's knowledge, spent representations, and limitation under Romanian law fail.

Court Disposition

Judgment for claimant (Petrom) against defendant (Glencore) for deceit.

Orders

  • Glencore to pay Petrom damages of US$40,071,913.
  • No award of exemplary damages.