Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum Company SA v Okta Crude Oil Refinery AD [2000] EWHC 208 (Comm) (26 January 2000)

Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum Company SA v Okta Crude Oil Refinery AD [2000] EWHC 208 (Comm) (26 January 2000)

Clause 1 of the 1993 agreement obliged Okta to make exclusive use of Jetoil for manipulation of non-heated crude oil purchased and processed for its own account. There was no minimum quantity obligation under clause 3. Upon failure to agree a price after 1 January 2000, the agreement ceased to have effect as there was no mechanism for price determination and no implied term for a reasonable fee.

Citation
[2000] EWHC 208 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Jetoil; Defendant: Okta
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2000
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment on Preliminary Issues of Contract Construction
Outcome
Declaratory judgment on construction of contract clauses; no damages awarded.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contracts, Exclusive Dealing, Minimum Quantity Obligations, Contractual Termination, Implied Terms
Contract Law Commercial Law Interpretation of Contracts Exclusive Dealing Minimum Quantity Obligations Contractual Termination Implied Terms

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jetoil

Claimant

Okta

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment on Preliminary Issues of Contract Construction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 1 of the 1993 agreement obliges the Refinery (Okta) to make exclusive use of Jetoil for manipulation of crude oil purchased for its own account
  2. 2 Whether clause 3 of the agreement obliges the Refinery to submit at least 500,000 metric tons of crude oil per annum to Jetoil
  3. 3 What rights are given to Jetoil by clause 6

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 1 of the 1993 agreement obliged Okta to make exclusive use of Jetoil for manipulation of non-heated crude oil purchased and processed for its own account. There was no minimum quantity obligation under clause 3. Upon failure to agree a price after 1 January 2000, the agreement ceased to have effect as there was no mechanism for price determination and no implied term for a reasonable fee.

Court Disposition

Declaratory judgment on construction of contract clauses; no damages awarded.

Orders

  • Clause 1 obliged Okta to use Jetoil exclusively for manipulation of crude oil for its own account.
  • No minimum quantity obligation under clause 3 after 14 December 1995.