Unaoil Ltd v Leighton Offshore Offshore Pte Ltd (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 2965 (Comm) (12 September 2014)

Unaoil Ltd v Leighton Offshore Offshore Pte Ltd (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 2965 (Comm) (12 September 2014)

The court held that Unaoil was not entitled to the debt claims or liquidated damages under the JICA MOA because SOC did not approve Unaoil as subcontractor for the JICA Project, which was a condition precedent to payment and performance. The Supplementary Agreements did not override this requirement. Leighton Offshore's refusal to pay did not constitute a repudiatory breach, as Unaoil was not approved and could not perform. The claim was dismissed.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2965 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Unaoil Ltd; Defendant: Leighton Offshore Pte Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Subcontractor Approval, Liquidated Damages, Repudiatory Breach, Debt Claims, Variation of Contract
Contract Law Commercial Law Subcontractor Approval Liquidated Damages Repudiatory Breach Debt Claims Variation of Contract

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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unaoil Ltd

Claimant

Leighton Offshore Pte Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Unaoil was entitled to debt claims under the JICA MOA
  2. 2 Whether Unaoil was entitled to liquidated damages under Article 8 of the JICA MOA
  3. 3 Whether Unaoil was entitled to damages for repudiatory breach

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Unaoil was not entitled to the debt claims or liquidated damages under the JICA MOA because SOC did not approve Unaoil as subcontractor for the JICA Project, which was a condition precedent to payment and performance. The Supplementary Agreements did not override this requirement. Leighton Offshore's refusal to pay did not constitute a repudiatory breach, as Unaoil was not approved and could not perform. The claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for debt under JICA MOA dismissed
  • Claim for liquidated damages dismissed