In addition to the explanatory statement on the most correct wording, an assessment of the scope of certain standard clauses should be particularly important in order to avoid risks related to the nature of certain legal structures that could lead to significant misunderstandings for the parties. One of these structures is the allocation of risks through compensation clauses. However, as with any other procedure aimed at harmonizing multiple and different issues, the standardization of contracts in the oil and gas sector has its advantages and disadvantages. The range of contract forms includes eleven standards: In one of them, WesternGeco Ltd v. ATP Oil and Gas, the contracting Westerngeco caused property damage to a third party, Total E-P. In accordance with the indemnification clause of the contract between the contractor and the employer ATP Oil and Gas, which is based on the standard LOGIC terms (as amended), the contractor was obliged to release the employer from any debt related to damages caused to the property of a third party. As a result of an action brought by Total E-P against the contractor, the contractor in turn sought compensation from the employer in excess of the total amount of payments received by the contractor for the work performed (as stated in the contract). You can purchase the following standard agreements and accompanying documents individually by clicking on the following links: The UK Offshore Operators Association (UKOOA) subcommittee is in the process of revising the standards. The Well Services form was the first to be revised and Edition 2 was published in mid-2001. The construction model is now in an advanced state of review and work has recently begun to examine design models, onshore services, offshore services and marine construction. The standard for mobile drilling facilities is also verified – comments have recently been submitted by members of the International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC). The main business conditions in the main areas of work are standardised in a number of contracts compiled by a committee of senior representatives of major economic operators and other parts of the industry.
These documents (formerly known as CRINE Contracts) were published by the Institute of Petroleum on behalf of LOGIC (Leading Oil and Gas Industry Competitiveness) and are available on the LOGIC www.logic-oil.com website. Both parties signed an agreement with a later implementation date and included a standard general termination clause in favour of BP, as it was virtually copied and inserted into the terms and conditions of a standard CRINE/LOGIC contract. After BP`s decision, In challenging such a decision against Dolphin, the Court of Justice held that the interpretation of the HoA on the basis of certain general principles of interpretation, as applied in an earlier case, as well as a specific and well-worded termination clause consistent with the same HoA, held that Dolphin`s interpretation could not be considered to be meaningless economic (BPe dies) and confirmed the position. In this regard, according to British jurisprudence, a paradigmatic case is BP Exploration Operating Company Limited v Dolphin Drilling Limited, which serves as a lesson to all those who overlook the risks associated with the use of standard contractual forms. In the oil and gas industry, standardization of contracts can be seen as an almost natural and unambitized process. Indeed, all these agreements, which have therefore been an ideal breeding ground for the development of standardized documents, are common as the 80% of clauses contained in the various forms of contractual agreements that have been used over the years. Such an ongoing effort to make standard CRINE/LOGIC forms as efficient as possible is not a delicate task.