Addax Energy SA v Petro Trade Inc
[2023] EWHC 1609 (Comm)
Anron Bunkering DMCC v Glencore Energy UK Ltd
14 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 295 (Comm)
High Court
Anron sued Glencore for money, but Glencore won because Anron didn't have a good reason why they should get the money and waited too long to sue. The court also thought Anron was trying to avoid paying its lawyers.
Key Facts
- •Anron Bunkering DMCC (Anron) claimed US$1,958,219.40 from Glencore Energy UK Ltd (Glencore) under two gasoline contracts (July 2015 and November 2015).
- •Glencore sought summary judgment, arguing the implied terms Anron claimed were not in the contracts and that the money had and received claims were time-barred.
- •Anron's claim was based on implied terms regarding accurate accounting of advance payments and alternatively, on unjust enrichment.
- •Anron failed to appear at the hearing due to lack of representation, citing issues with their previous solicitors and difficulties finding new representation due to payment delays related to the war in Yemen.
- •The court considered Anron's adjournment application and Glencore's summary judgment application.
- •Advance payments totaling around US$52.1 million were made by Anron.
Legal Principles
Principles applicable to summary judgment applications (including the need to consider whether there is a real prospect of success).
Easyair Limited v Opal Telecom Ltd [2009] EWHC 339 (Ch)
Test for implying terms into a contract (reasonableness, necessity for business efficacy, obviousness, clear expression, non-contradiction of express terms).
Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd [2015] UKSC 72
Limitation period for claims founded on simple contract is six years (section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980).
Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2020] UKSC 47
Claims for unjust enrichment based on failure of basis; whether contract termination is necessary.
BP Oil International Ltd v Vega Petroleum Ltd [2021] EWHC 1364 (Comm); Dargamo Holdings Ltd v Avonwick Holdings Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1149
Whether a document acknowledging a debt but asserting a set-off that extinguishes the debt constitutes a statutory acknowledgment.
McGee on Limitation Periods (9th ed, para 18-035); Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka [1977] 1 WLR 565
Outcomes
Anron's adjournment application was rejected.
The delay caused by adjournment would be significant, wasting court resources and money. Anron's explanation for lack of representation was unsatisfactory; the court believed Anron was responsible for its situation and possibly attempting to avoid legal fees.
Glencore's summary judgment application was granted.
Anron's claims based on implied terms failed because those terms were not necessary for business efficacy and were not obvious. The alternative claims for money had and received were time-barred. Even applying the more lenient test from *Dargamo*, the claims failed.
Similar Cases
Glencore Energy UK Limited v Nis J.S.C. Novi Sad
[2023] EWHC 370 (Comm)
Litasco SA v Der Mond Oil and Gas Africa SA & Anor
[2023] EWHC 2866 (Comm)
Iluminesia Limited (t/a Alterego Facades) v RFL Facades Limited
[2023] EWHC 3122 (TCC)
Naftiran Intertrade Company (NICO) Limited & Anor v GL Greenland Limited & Anor
[2024] EWHC 1364 (Comm)