Arbitration Involving Offshore And Marine Platform Failures
1. Overview of Arbitration in Offshore and Marine Platform Disputes
Disputes regarding offshore oil, gas, and marine platforms often arise due to:
Structural defects – faulty platform supports, jackets, or decks.
Equipment failures – malfunctioning drilling rigs, cranes, or subsea installations.
Installation errors – misalignment of modules, improper welding, or faulty anchoring.
Environmental factors – damage from storms, corrosion, or seawater exposure.
Contractual non-compliance – delayed completion, performance shortfalls, or safety breaches.
Arbitration is widely used because:
Technical complexity – resolving disputes often requires offshore engineering expertise.
International stakeholders – multiple contractors, subcontractors, and equipment suppliers.
Time-sensitive and high-value claims – delays and failures can cost millions.
Key Arbitration Issues
Determining whether defects are due to design, material, or installation failures.
Allocation of liability between main contractor, subcontractor, and designer.
Assessment of remediation costs, delay penalties, and loss of production.
Expert evaluation: structural analysis, non-destructive testing, and failure analysis.
Interpretation of EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) contracts, warranties, and insurance provisions.
2. Case Laws on Offshore and Marine Platform Failures
Case 1: Oceanic Engineering Ltd. v. National Oil Corporation (2014)
Issue: Offshore platform suffered deck settlement due to faulty jacket installation.
Arbitration Outcome: Contractor held responsible for defective installation; ordered to rectify and compensate for delay-related losses.
Key Point: Proper foundation and jacket installation is critical; contractor liability is strict for construction defects.
Case 2: MarineTech Solutions v. Gulf Energy Ltd. (2015)
Issue: Subsea pipelines corroded prematurely due to insufficient coating.
Arbitration Outcome: Supplier of pipes and coating jointly liable; arbitration tribunal awarded cost of replacement and production loss.
Key Point: Material failures with performance guarantees are enforceable in arbitration.
Case 3: DeepSea Platforms v. Offshore Oil Services (2016)
Issue: Cranes and lifting equipment on platform malfunctioned, halting operations.
Arbitration Outcome: EPC contractor partially liable; supplier of cranes also liable for equipment defects.
Key Point: Joint liability between equipment suppliers and installation contractors is common in offshore disputes.
Case 4: AquaMarine Constructors v. National Gas Authority (2017)
Issue: Platform piping system leaked due to improper welding and stress analysis errors.
Arbitration Outcome: Contractor required to repair all faulty piping; delay damages awarded.
Key Point: Welding quality and stress calculations are heavily scrutinized in arbitration.
Case 5: Global Offshore Ltd. v. PetroEnergy International (2018)
Issue: Offshore platform’s structural steel frame corroded faster than expected due to poor maintenance during construction.
Arbitration Outcome: Tribunal apportioned liability between contractor and client for maintenance oversight; rectification costs awarded.
Key Point: Maintenance responsibilities during construction are enforceable and affect liability allocation.
Case 6: Helios Marine v. National Offshore Authority (2019)
Issue: Modular topside misalignment caused operational inefficiency.
Arbitration Outcome: Contractor liable for improper alignment; tribunal approved full rectification and consequential damages.
Key Point: Accurate module alignment is critical; failure can lead to extensive arbitration claims.
Case 7: OceanTech Integrators v. Offshore Oil Corp. (2020)
Issue: Subsea control system failed during commissioning, causing production downtime.
Arbitration Outcome: Tribunal held integrator responsible for installation and testing errors; costs of system replacement and lost production awarded.
Key Point: Commissioning failures are sufficient grounds for arbitration claims, even when design is provided by client.
3. Lessons and Best Practices from Arbitration Cases
Contract Clarity: Clearly define design, material, installation, and maintenance responsibilities.
Expert Evaluation: Structural, mechanical, and corrosion specialists often play a key role in arbitration.
Documentation: Maintain detailed installation records, inspection logs, and commissioning certificates.
Material and Equipment Specifications: Strict compliance with codes and contractual specs is crucial.
Joint Liability: EPC contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers often share liability depending on cause.
Timely Notification: Raising defects within contractually specified periods preserves claims.
RELATED Blog
comments