Energy Venture Partners Ltd v Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd
2014
COMMERCIAL COURT
United Kingdom
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE EDER
Areas of Law
- Commercial Law
- Civil Procedure
2014
COMMERCIAL COURT
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Energy Venture Partners Ltd (EVP) filed a claim against Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd (Malabu) for commission on services related to an oil license sale. An initial judgment awarded EVP US$110.5m plus interest, with Malabu paying US$215m into court as security. Both parties filed applications seeking to vary the terms of this judgment. The court found that it had jurisdiction under CPR 3.1(7) to vary orders, but refused Malabu's application to change interest terms while granting EVP's request for payment out from court funds.
Judgment
Mr Justice Eder:
Introduction
On 7 March 2014, I heard three separate applications to vary a previous Order of Gloster LJ dated 18 July 2013 (the “Order”) which she made in these proceedings following a trial in the Commercial Court between the Claimant, Energy Venture Partners Ltd (“EVP”), and the Defendant, Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd (“Malabu”). At the end of that hearing, I informed the parties of my decisions with regard to each of those applications. This Judgment sets out briefly the reasons for such decisions.
For present purposes, the details of the original claim and Judgment of Gloster LJ are not directly material. It is sufficient to note that Malabu was the owner of a 100% interest in an oil prospecting licence for Block 245, an oil field located in the Eastern Niger Delta in the offshore territorial waters of Nigeria until April 2011 when it sold its interest for US$ 1.3bn; that EVP advanced a claim for commission against Malabu for services provided in connection with the sale on a number of different bases; and that at an early stage of the proceedings, EVP had obtained a freezing order in support of its claim which resulted in Malabu paying US$ 215m into Court in August 2011 by way of security.
The trial before Gloster J (as she then was) commenced on 27 November 2012 and concluded on 20 December 2012. Judgment was handed down on 17 July 2013 (the “Judgment”). In essence, Gloster LJ (as she had become by that date) concluded that EVP’s primary claim for an orally-agreed sum of US$ 200m failed but that EVP’s first alternative claim succeeded, with the result that EVP was entitled, on the basis of an implied contract, alternatively implied term, to a reasonable fee for the services performed by it in the sum of US$ 110.5m plus interest (the “Composite Judgment Sum”).
There then followed a consequentials hearing on 17 and 18 July 2013 addressing various matters including Malabu’s application for permission to appeal all of which were dealt with by Gloster LJ, in part in a further extempore Judgment (the “Consequentials Judgment”) and in part in a further written Judgment handed down on 9 August 2013, and subsequently incorporated in the Order.
The Order dated 18 July 2013
The Order provided in material part as follows:
“ 1. Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Claimant against the Defendant in the sum of US$110,500,000, and pre-judgment interest in the sum of US$11,034,863.01 (being simple interest at a rate of 4.5% from 2