Business case
A dispute arose under a long-term gas sale agreement involving take-or-pay obligations in an LNG delivery chain ending in India. The claimant sought compensation based on the full value of undelivered gas. The key issue was whether that amount reflected the actual loss of a gas marketer operating in a back-to-back contractual structure.
The analysis helped the Tribunal assess the claimant’s real economic position rather than the face value of the contractual claim. The direct and cross-examination provided the Tribunal with a clear understanding that a full-value claim could materially overstate loss where the claimant acted as a low-margin marketer and did not incur equivalent upstream exposure.
Our experts analysed the LNG transaction chain and quantified the claimant’s actual economic exposure as a marketer. We tested the impact of resale, internal consumption and the absence of equivalent upstream take-or-pay charges on the claimed loss.