Petroplus Marketing AG v Shell Trading International Ltd

Petroplus Marketing AG v Shell Trading International Ltd

The contract was not validly varied by the 12 June 2008 communication and Shell's response; there was no binding agreement to change the pricing provision. Petroplus is entitled to payment calculated by reference to the bill of lading date, even if the delivery was late, as the payment and pricing provisions require payment without deduction, set-off, or counterclaim. Shell's arguments based on estoppel, implied terms, or circuity of action do not defeat Petroplus' claim for summary judgment.

Parties
Claimant: Petroplus Marketing AG; Defendant: Shell Trading International Ltd.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for claimant
Legal Topics
Variation of Contract, Estoppel, Implied Terms, Summary Judgment, Set Off and Counterclaim, Interpretation of Payment Provisions
Contract Law Commercial Law Variation of Contract Estoppel Implied Terms Summary Judgment Set Off and Counterclaim Interpretation of Payment Provisions

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

Petroplus Marketing AG

Claimant

Shell Trading International Ltd.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pricing provision in the contract was validly varied by subsequent communications
  2. 2 Whether Petroplus is estopped from denying a variation of the pricing provision
  3. 3 Whether Petroplus can claim the price calculated by reference to the bill of lading date despite late delivery

Ratio Decidendi

The contract was not validly varied by the 12 June 2008 communication and Shell's response; there was no binding agreement to change the pricing provision. Petroplus is entitled to payment calculated by reference to the bill of lading date, even if the delivery was late, as the payment and pricing provisions require payment without deduction, set-off, or counterclaim. Shell's arguments based on estoppel, implied terms, or circuity of action do not defeat Petroplus' claim for summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for claimant

Orders

  • Petroplus is entitled to summary judgment for the claimed amount. Directions to be made for the trial of Shell’s counterclaim.