Home / Europe / United Kingdom / Dispute Resolution / Energy Disputes

Energy Disputes

Back to Dispute Resolution

International energy companies operate in a complex and challenging environment. Investments in the energy sector are often high-value, high-risk transactions involving projects that rely on cutting edge technology. In addition to the technical challenges in this heavily regulated industry, the progressive development of reserves and infrastructure around the globe, and the need for ongoing geographic diversification, have exposed energy companies to increased legal and political risk. In such an environment, despite best business practices, disputes may be unavoidable.

When disputes occur, energy companies expect their lawyers to be true specialists that understand the industry. The Energy Disputes Team focuses entirely on advising and representing clients in the energy sector. Their experience covers all forms of dispute resolution, including international arbitration (both commercial and investor-state), litigation (either of the underlying dispute or in support of arbitral proceedings), expert determination, adjudication and mediation.

CMS is consistently ranked in the Global Arbitration Review ‘GAR30’ of the world’s busiest international arbitration practices. The Energy Disputes Team has a recognised expertise and track record in high value and complex international arbitration and litigation in the energy sector.

As trusted advisers to numerous international energy companies, our energy disputes offering is truly global. We advise clients across the world, from the UK to South America to the Far East. We have significant recent experience in regions such as continental Europe, sub-Saharan Africa (for example, Angola, Cameroon, Congo, Madagascar, Nigeria), North Africa (including Algeria, Egypt, Morroco, Tunisia), the Middle East (including extensive experience in Iraq) and Brazil.

Project Advisory and Risk Management

The team also offers a ‘Project Advisory and Risk Management’ service - offering advice on how to avoid disputes at every stage of the lifecycle for major energy projects. As the legal, contractual and regulatory environment in which major projects are delivered becomes ever more complex, proactive management of risk has become a critical part of delivery strategies. 

Our team provides flexible support to help you maximise opportunities and manage time, cost and quality risks that have the potential to impact the successful outcome of a project. This early intervention by our team minimises your risk of a costly dispute, protecting your reputation and your relationship with clients. 

Our services include analysis of documentation and procedures, producing proforma documents and communication strategies, delivery of teach-in workshops to project delivery and commercial teams, regular project surgeries and risk review workshops, telephone helpline providing real-time project advice and post completion reviews.

"CMS has a powerhouse energy practice with an impressive breadth of experience in corporate oil and gas matters."

Chambers, 2024

"Its energy practice offers strength in the full spectrum of energy projects in numerous jurisdictions."

Chambers, 2024

"The team acts for an enviable roster of clients."

Chambers, 2024

"They do not waste time on unnecessary activity, but focus on the client request and execute it."

Legal 500, 2021

"The team has an in-depth knowledge of the oil and gas industry and the types of issues company like ours face today."

Chambers, 2021
Highlights of our experience in Energy Disputes in the UK
A major oil and gas company on a USD 250m ICC arbitration concerning a North African production sharing contract. The arbitration is French-language with a Geneva seat. Twelve LNG and natural gas price...
Law-Now: Energy Disputes
Visit Law-Now for legal know-how and commentary
Advising the Board

Feed

11/05/2023
CMS strengthens Infrastructure, Construction and Energy Disputes team with...
International law firm CMS has appointed Philip Norman as a Partner in the firm’s Infrastructure, Construction and Energy (ICE) Disputes Team in London, with a focus on the Middle East and Africa. Philip...
17/03/2023
Six things landlords need to know about minimum energy efficiency standards...
In 2018, the government introduced MEES to improve the energy efficiency of private rented property. In this six-part series, we discuss the impact the MEES Regulations will have on landlords and tenants before and after 1 April 2023, and the actions landlords should take as a result.
02/11/2022
Risk Essentials: Season of Protest
Protests are everywhere. There are protests on the streets and outside business premises. There are protests online. Your workforce is protesting. Even litigation is being used as a means of protest...
13/09/2022
Oil and Gas Disputes Survey: 2021-22
We are delighted to present this year’s CMS Oil and Gas Disputes Survey. Once again, we have reached out to a wide cross section of senior legal managers and senior in-house counsel representing key players to get their views on the main drivers of disputes and dispute management within the global oil and gas industry. As part of our in-depth survey, we have also focused on what legal experts are doing to manage the risk of conflicts arising within their operations and to mitigate the prospect of disputes. The survey represents the views of over 50 industry professionals covering all corners of the globe: Europe, the Middle East, Asia-Pacific, Africa, Latin America, and North America. We are grateful for their valuable insights into how and where disputes arise and how they are managed in different markets across the industry. Given the multiple international regions covered by our report, with their different regimes and differing priorities and issues, it’s not surprising to see a broad range of views being conveyed by the survey participants. There are however some common areas of concern that respondents in all regions have highlighted in terms of the impact they have on triggering industry disputes. These include the potential for supply chain issues to lead to a dispute, a concern which will only have been heightened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
07/10/2021
Evolution not revolution: Corporate Responsibility and Climate Change
Climate change, sustainability, and ESG are no longer niche areas of interest – they have become fundamental to the way businesses operate and impact the way we live our lives. Companies face an important...
30/03/2021
Key Findings of the CMS oil & gas disputes survey
The three geographic locations identified as highest risk in terms of the prospects of a dispute arising were: Africa (28% of respondents, and 60% of those who operate in that region); the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS) (37% of all respondents, and 50% of those who operate in the UKCS); and Latin America (17% of total respondents and 40% of those who operate in the region).
30/03/2021
Interview with Duncan Holland, Head of Legal, Cairn Energy
What are the key risks that the industry is facing? Where are you seeing the most potential for disputes? It is largely about the financial situation. Across the industry, we are seeing more disagreements even with parties in joint ventures, where there may not be a huge amount of money at stake, but companies are seeking to preserve cash and not be tied into work commitments.  What operations are most likely to lead to disputes and how are you approaching topical issues such as force majeure?  We are in a different world where some long-term contracts and work commitments of operators don’t make sense anymore and it’s not going to change in the next 12 to 18 months, which is increasingly leading to disputes. Force majeure has taken up a bit of time in the last few months. If you physically can’t operate, then force majeure is pretty clear, but as restrictions are then relaxed in some parts of the world while remaining in others, it can become quite complex. Particularly in the oil and gas industry where people and equipment can be moving around the world. How do you see the impact of climate change policies and priorities?  Governments, shareholders and regulatory bodies in many countries are looking at in­creased reg­u­la­tion in the immediate and near-term future and that will be a key issue when looking at new projects.  How is the typical in-house legal team addressing these risks in today’s climate? And how might this compare to five or 10 years ago? I think there is a general trend to more quickly use external counsel, because there used to be more disputes resolved amicably. The temperature has increased. We don’t necessarily end up in court, but we have the potential to do so. People can be emotive about disputes and it can become more tense. What you want is for ex­tern­al coun­sel to see through that and see what the underlying issue is. And so it’s about being able to cut through all that noise in these disputes and seeing where the strong points and the weak points are and asking: ‘is this worth pursuing’? We need lawyers to be commercial while un­der­stand­ing all the key moving parts.  Where do you feel that the industry can improve its management of risk and disputes?  People can keep better records. A lot of problems arise out of meetings where people disagreed about certain things and the two parties have records that are wildly dif­fer­ent. Also, clearer drafting at the outset. Often you have complicated agreements and people are keen to get them concluded and signed, even though there is often vague language trying to deal with highly complex situations. You need to have these discussions early to try and deal with some of the problems before they arise. It’s easier to reach agreement on a lot of these issues when things are amicable.
30/03/2021
Risk mitigation: limiting the fallout
Even if the oil and gas industry faces more risk and is prone to more ten­sions, clashes and disagreements, it does have the means of tackling these concerns. Over 91% of The CMS Oil and Gas Disputes Sur­vey re­spond­ents indicated that there is room for improvement in managing dispute-related risks. Just as the industry is evolving and shifting according to economic, geopolitical and social changes, so too are the means of addressing risks and minimising the chances of dis­agree­ments.
30/03/2021
Interview with Sandra Redding, General Counsel, Seadrill
Where are you seeing the most potential for disputes?  Whenever we see macroeconomic financial challenges in the industry, we see changing priorities for all players, and that leads to a desire to find flexibility in existing commitments, to move in different directions. Naturally that can see an increase in disputes coming through the supply chain, and for long term supply relationships. We see challenges coming through an increasing focus on local content, environmental and issues arising from international labour mobility due to changes in labour laws globally. Where do you see the biggest potential for disputes geo­graph­ic­ally?  We are seeing operational interruption evenly distributed across the globe as we move through the pandemic. That has been a great leveller this past year in terms of commercial disputes. Certain social and political pressures have over the past several years put pressure on local content policies in almost every continent. And we’re seeing tensions coming through the maturing of employment law in certain labour markets. As General Counsel, where have you felt the most pressure during the COVID crisis?  Initially it was the relentless pace of it all, needing to solve very new challenges simultaneously, in terms of working locations, moving people around internationally, contract implications. As the pandemic draws out, we are seeing more fundamental impacts; permanently changed working methods, locations and structures. Which brings opportunities to respond more creatively in the longer term to the lower demand that we are seeing across the industry through 2021, and potentially beyond. Which activities are most likely to lead to disputes right now?  Operational delay due to COVID and force majeure is a really hot issue. Movement of goods and people across borders and to offshore loc­a­tions con­tin­ues to be very challenging.  How are in-house teams typically starting to use technology?  The use of AI and automation in our supply chain and commercial agreements has huge potential to help us manage risk through standardisation and greater alignment between suites of project agreements across our enterprise. It is the key to cost and time efficiency in contracting. It’s much easier for us to run stats on our agreements to increase consistency of content, and be able to monitor key metrics. As an offshore drilling company, we are hugely adept at developing and using innovative technology. That shouldn’t stop when it comes to our onshore business. What involvement do you typically seek from external counsel and in what cir­cum­stances would you look to bring them in?  No matter the calibre of a strong in-house team like Seadrill’s, international businesses like ours will always look for quality specialist jurisdictional knowledge. Having the international umbrella of external firms, helping us access and manage local content in emerging jurisdictions and challenging jurisdictions, is hugely valuable. In areas like complex dispute management, law firms are becoming real specialists in their ability to handle and process the volumes of data involved and offer a more joined-up service to get all the way through to resolution.
30/03/2021
Riding out the storm
Although another super-cycle can never be discounted in the oil industry, market analysts currently consider it unlikely that the oil and gas industry will ever experience the conditions that immediately preceded the 2008 financial crisis. In that period, businesses were able to generate significant profits thanks to skyrocketing oil prices and significant global demand. As the green economy gains further traction, buoyed by political and societal support, inevitably oil and gas players will face challenges. It will not always be easy to preserve cordial relationships with joint venture partners, contractors, supply chains and host states. Where tensions build, it will be essential to have the right methods in place to mollify friction and unease.
30/03/2021
Operational problems: activities and relationships that can lead to disputes
It is notable that in The CMS Oil and Gas Disputes Survey, respondents singled out projects and joint ventures as the aspects of their activities that bring the highest risk of disputes arising. As far as joint venture disputes are concerned, in more benign times, when oil prices were considerably higher, when the global economy was growing, and before the oil and gas market became more fragmented, industry players would have been perhaps more likely to avoid disputes with a joint venturer or resolve issues quickly. Disputes with a joint venture partner over a relatively small matter in a single jurisdiction might jeopardise a more luc­rat­ive glob­al re­la­tion­ship. The wider commercial imperatives would often vastly outweigh the gains from a legal battle. Duncan Holland, Head of Legal at Cairn Energy says: “In years gone by when the oil price was closer to $100, the banks were freer with their lending, people were less constrained, and disputes were more easily resolved. People would just meet in the middle.”Now that the market is more segmented and with both larger companies and independent players having tighter financial resources, the incentive to launch disputes seems to be greater. Relatively speaking oil companies simply have more to lose. “Fifteen years ago, there were very few joint venture disputes,” comments Phillip Ashley, a CMS Energy Disputes Partner. He says that in certain regions, the frequency of these kinds of disputes seems to have grown as assets are divested to smal­ler en­tit­ies and private equity-backed companies - that have tighter profit margins. They also have less ex­tens­ive fund­ing arrangements meaning that it may be less straight­for­ward for them to simply ‘meet in the middle’. Also, many of these smaller companies do not have the kind of extensive portfolio that traditional oil and gas companies would have had. As a result, there may be less need to balance relationships across multiple joint venture interests. Moreover, some joint venture agreements were put into place decades ago, when exploration in a particular area commenced. That means that they incorporate approaches to accounting and governance which are no longer reflective of today’s market. In some cases the existing contractual arrangements have not fully anticipated the challenges associated with continuing to produce from a mature asset, or those that arise as production winds down and the oil field infrastructure moves closer to decommissioning. These historic contractual arrangements often also do not account for asset ownership by companies that are structured in a very different way to the companies that carried out the original exploration work. Valerie Allan, a CMS Energy Disputes Partner, says that court records show a marked increase in joint venture cases. It is perhaps not surprising that respondents identified projects as the other key area of risk as regards the potential for disputes to arise. E&P projects require significant financial investment, sometimes (for example, in drilling exploration wells) with no guarantee of any return. The work is often being undertaken in a difficult physical environment and, despite extensive planning, in many cases (such as exploration wells) there will be no certainty as to the result. Technical complexity means there is always the potential for things to go wrong, and that complexity is increasing, for example, in mature basins where new technology is required to deliver barrels from deeper, higher pressure wells. Particularly where projects are to bring new or additional production online, there will be real commercial pressures to achieve first hydrocarbons as quickly as possible in order to facilitate a return on investment. Added to that, the continuing low oil price puts significant pressure on margins, driving downcontractor rates in an increasingly competitive market and leaving little contingency for unexpected events.
30/03/2021
Where do the disputes come from?
A collection of inter-related activities and business relationships pose a considerable challenge to oil and gas industry players. Projects and supply chains are complex, while joint ventures can be tested by financial constraints and tighter profit margins. At the same time, oil and gas businesses are at the forefront of attention from many host states and regulators as a result of (i) the current increasing focus on ESG issues and environmental targets and (ii) the need for the relevant government to use oil operations as a source of state revenue. In some regions, those chal­lenges are accompanied by local content laws and nationalistic policies which add to the complexity. In a generally harsh global business environment made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is logical, that industry players would be wary of disputes and their possible consequences.