The relevance of market expert evidence in determining whether a deal has been done
This briefing focuses on Proton Energy Group SA v Public Company Orlen Lietuva  EWHC (Comm). In this case, in the context of an application for summary judgment, the Commercial Court considered whether or not there was a real issue to be tried as to whether a binding contract had been concluded between the parties based on a review of their negotiations.
Proton Energy Group SA (Proton), a Swiss trader of oil and gasoline related products, and Publicv Company Orlen Lietuva (Orlen), a petroleum refining company incorporated in Lithuania, exchanged e-mails regarding the sale and purchase of crude oil mix. The parties accepted that the following exchanges had occurred:
- Proton e-mailed Orlen a “firm offer” to sell CIF Butinge, Lithuania 25,000mt +/- 10% in Seller’s option of crude oil mix CN27090090, European origin as per the specifications attached, with delivery period at the discharge port during 10-15 July 2012 and at a price based on five quotations after the bill of lading date.
- E-mail correspondence continued between the parties on the same day, culminating in a oneword e-mail from Orlen stating “Confirmed”…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Ince & Co briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
Why register to The Lawyer
More relevant to you
News from Ince & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Ince & Co
Affected parties must think about who will be the ’operator’ for the purposes of the new European regulations.
The commercial understanding of the phrases ‘as is’ or ‘as is where is’ has always been that a buyer must take a yacht in the condition in which she is found at the time defined in the contract.