The IEA described this stockpile as "an unprecedented buffer against geopolitical shocks or unexpected supply disruptions." The glut in oil supplies is expected to maintain pressure on global oil prices, which many analysts predict will remain at the lower end of a $54-$64.0/bbl range during 2016.
In this post, we highlight two observable trends in the M&A activities of industry participants during 2015 as they navigate the current challenges facing the sector.
Companies are re-evaluating their investments and debt exposure
Oil and gas companies are striving to remain competitive in the face of a sustained low in global oil prices.许多人正在重新评价他们的投资,特别是高杠杆公司正寻找减债水平 。
2015年11月16日ahrefsPrime Oil预期在2015年底前完成交易并计划使用销售所得来割减其债务 。Cairn Energy's investment arbitration proceedings against India recently demonstrated the importance of default arbitrator nomination procedures in international arbitration.
Cairn Energy's dispute with India
In March 2015, Cairn UK Holdings Limited received a draft assessment order from Indian tax authorities, requiring payment equivalent to US$1.6 billion, plus any applicable interest and penalties, in respect of the 2006-2007 fiscal year.[1] The assessment was made under a 2012 law pursuant to which the Indian government has tried to tax transactions retrospectively,[2] in this case due to a group reorganization that facilitated Cairn Indian Limited's IPO Cairn Energy, the ultimate parent company of both Cairn UK Holdings Limited and Cairn India Limited, contests the assessment.
While other companies have sought to resolve similar issues before the national Indian courts, Cairn Energy commenced a claim under the UK-India Investment Promotion and Protection Treaty, arguing that India has expropriated Cairn Energy's investments by attaching its shares in Cairn Indian Limited.[3] Cairn Energy filed its notice of dispute in March 2015 and appointed an arbitrator for a three-person tribunal in late May 2015.[4]
Initially, the Indian government refused to participate in the arbitration proceedings and failed to appoint an arbitrator, arguing that there was no basis for the claim in the treaty. This prevented the arbitration proceedings from going forward. But the treaty specifies a default appointment procedure, allowing either party to request the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to make appointments to the tribunal if a party fails to make a timely appointment.[5] Cairn Energy relied on this provision and applied to the President of the ICJ on September 22, 2015. Only eight days later, India announced that it would appoint its arbitrator and participate in the proceedings.[6]
Default nomination procedures: strategic choices in arbitration
Energy companies often operate in complex legal and commercial environments, where there may be an incentive for a counter-party to strategically delay or disrupt proceedings.Cairn Energy最近的经验显示,在投资者-州和商业仲裁中,援引默认提名程序可以帮助防止阻抗方中断程序。
万博体育app手机登录举例说,根据《能源宪章条约》,申请人可选择向ICSID、贸易法委员会仲裁规则法庭或斯德哥尔摩商会程序提交争议。
[1] Indian Tax Dispute, Cairn Energy Press Release, March 10, 2015.
[2] This law has been used in an attempt to collect retrospective taxes against other companies as well, such as Royal Dutch Shell and Vodaphone.See Shell Wins India Tax Case, Reuters, Nov.和
[5] UK-India Investment Promotion and Protection Treaty, Article 9(c)(ii).
[6] Government Changes Tone on Cairn Tax Case, The Financial Express, Oct.2015年1、2++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Scottish Government is but one of many critics of the decision, along with industry representatives, UK media outlets and business commentators.剑桥商学院工商经济学教授MichaelPollitt有称拟议修改 为`em>错误 ,时间轴是岸风技术成本“em>正向电网对齐 英国工商联合会副总长Katja Hall表示更广泛的关注 : CutingForestations计划提前发送一个令人担忧信号,说明英国能源政策框架稳定化。 http://www.theguardian-carrington-blog+15/jun/18/wind-form-subsides-politicate-trups-the-national这不仅对业界是一个打击,而且可能损害我们作为能源基础设施投资良好场所的声望. .s/p>
2015年初6月英国能源与气候变化局(“DECC')预期会宣布计划关闭岸风现有补贴计划-ForeestsbrictThis announcement has been delayed amid concerns that it could spark potential legal challenges from the industry and lead to a dispute with the Scottish Government over the future of onshore wind.
In this three-part series, we outline how the RO operates, the potential impact of the early closure of the RO upon the onshore wind industry, and the possible routes for challenge and redress for industry participants who may be affected.
Part Three: An Overview of the Legal Mechanisms for Challenge and Redress by
Those Potentially Affected by the Early Closure of the Renewables Obligation
In the first two parts of this series, we considered how the RO operates, possible plans to close the RO in 2016, and the potential impact of those plans upon the onshore wind industry.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++最近太阳能工业使用这条路线,结果参差参差http://www.theguardian.com/environments/2012/mar/23/uk-government-solar-feed-in-gostsi.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/3677.html投资人如成功,可因政府采取的措施而损失投资而获得补偿。然而,只有与英国签有投资条约并按适用条约定义在英国进行了合格投资的成员国的外国投资者才能使用这一选择。 包括西班牙在内的一些欧洲国家目前正根据《能源宪章条约》因国家太阳能补贴改变而被外国投资者起诉。Marcus TrinickQC代表英国可再生能源公司有http://www.theguardian.com/environment+15/jun/01/amber-rudd-dort-droy-the-wind-power-Cindustry>在一个位置上,我们无法支付不参战费用,特别是如果采取行动回溯性干预。 maf Smith,ServerUk代理执行官,有s stated
2015年初6月英国能源与气候变化局(“DECC')预期会宣布计划关闭岸风现有补贴计划-ForeestsbrictThis announcement has been delayed amid concerns that it could spark potential legal challenges from the industry and lead to a dispute with the Scottish Government over the future of onshore wind.
In this three-part series, we outline how the RO operates, the potential impact of the early closure of the RO upon the onshore wind industry, and the possible routes for challenge and redress for industry participants who may be affected.
Part Two: How Would the Renewables Obligation's
Early Closure Affect the UK Onshore Wind Industry?
Part One of this series outlined the RO scheme and the expected announcement to close the RO earlier than anticipated.第二篇文章中,我们考虑了此类措施对岸风产业的潜在影响。
完成与分权机构(苏格兰和北爱尔兰)的磋商并发布详细建议,对产业影响时间和性质不确定。
目前约有3000台新轮机,总容量7千兆瓦以上请求规划许可,其中许多人期望获得RO认证布隆贝格能源金融 < a hrefsies>网站http://www.theguardian.com/environment+15/jun/01/uk-再生能源-industry-warns-of-legal-action-oversubsi苏格兰第一大臣和总理对岸风未来显然关系紧张(本系列首篇文章中曾提到),目前尚不确定苏格兰可应用ROC是否将在2016年关闭对任何拟议措施可能产生的影响而言,这是一个重要的考虑因素。
并不清楚这些修改是否会有“宽度周期”,这将使那些已经获得规划许可的项目被纳入ROM体系,并关闭那些不这样做的项目的ROinfinis能源开发商董事长Ian Marchant:
本系列最后文章中,我们将考虑行业参与者可采取哪些行动,哪些可能因ROM提前关闭而受到影响。
2015年初6月英国能源与气候变化局(“DECC')预期会宣布计划关闭岸风现有补贴计划-ForeestsbrictThis announcement has been delayed amid concerns that it could spark potential legal challenges from the industry and lead to a dispute with the Scottish Government over the future of onshore wind.
In this three-part series, we outline how the RO operates, the potential impact of the early closure of the RO upon the onshore wind industry, and the possible routes for challenge and redress for industry participants who may be affected.
Part One: An Overview of the Renewables Obligation and Plans for Its Early Closure
How does the RO operate?
The RO is designed to support renewable electricity projects in the UK.要求英国电商从合格可再生能源中提供一定比例电源给客户ROF < a hrefss/www.ofgem.gov.uk/Envice-products/reservas-obligation-ro/Infe-generators/closure-reservations-ro'供应商不提供足够ROC满足RO时,必须支付称为买断价的罚款Ofgem从买出价中收集的资金按比例再分配给提供方。
/pem>什么是ROA建议修改? /before赢得英国大选,推迟宣布这些措施的依据似乎有双重性 。
First,保守党总理David Cameron和苏格兰第一大臣兼SNP领导人Nicola Sturgon对岸风的未来持有反对意见Cameron表示“Tem>enenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenenentostiptections/serveregraph.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon/11620425/Nicola-Sturgeon-deces-veto-overwind-serve-subsides.html'elegraph.co.uk/news/Energy/再生11666295/Serve-Exceptition-on-dwin-aps-as-susidy-axe-delayed.html可能对行业造成的影响在本序列第二部分中加以考虑。
In agreements spanning 10 years or more, parties may have the ability to revise the contract price if there is a significant change in market circumstances.[3] For buyers and sellers of natural gas and LNG, it will be important to determine whether the recent trends are a long-term significant change that should be reflected in their price formulae.
The fall in oil prices has been stunning. As shown by the graph below, the Brent price has declined by approximately 50 per cent, from over $110 per barrel in June 2014 to just under $60 dollars today.
British prices are 30 per cent lower than on the same date last year. The Henry Hub price, long-considered a proxy for the price of natural gas in the U.S.,[4] is down approximately 49 per cent over the last year.
In these circumstances, buyers under long-term gas and LNG sales agreements may believe that the formula in their contract is not reflecting the extent of the change in oil price, while sellers may believe that the same formula is over-reflecting the change. As a result, either party to the contract may seek to change the price formula to reflect alleged changes in circumstances.
Parties may hotly dispute whether it is appropriate to revise the price formula. The party seeking to change the contract price must usually demonstrate a need to revise the formula by satisfying a test or standard set out in the contract.通常称它为触发器 。例如协议条件可能要求一方显示能源市场发生了重大变化 。
The causes of the recent trends, and whether these trends are long-term realities, are a matter of debate among economists. Some argue that a decision by OPEC to drive American shale oil producers out of the market has impacted the balance of supply and demand and is only temporary. Others identify weak global economic activity as the primary explanation.并重新评估市场对物价的影响对其他人来说 美国dollar's recent appreciation is a key factor.
In the current circumstances, parties contemplating a potential price review should consider these recent trends with a wary eye on the trigger of their price review clause. Showing "change" alone is seldom, if ever, adequate. Parties must frequently show that the change is lasting. This can be a high hurdle. While it is easy to evaluate what has already occurred, it can be difficult to project that these changes will continue to impact oil prices and/or gas markets in the future. For parties considering a price review, it will be important to consider each of the possible economic explanations and determine whether they are significant, lasting changes. The answer may be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
[1] See our post from October 2014 on the implications of a falling oil price on energy sector investments.
[2] This description is a very simple explanation of how gas pricing formulae work. The reality is much more complex. Formulae vary widely and can include variables for a range of other energy types, inflation and other market forces.
[3] See our previous post for a primer on long-term gas supply contracts.
[4] This thinking may be changing as gas production in other regions of the United States becomes more prevalent.
[5] This is simply one example. Price review provisions in long-term agreements vary and there is no typical clause.
Oil prices have plunged in the last few months. For example, Brent futures traded at over $110 per barrel in June, and fell below $85 last week. This is a fall of over 20%, and the market price for crude oil is now at its lowest level since 2010.
Oil prices impact activities in the sector and, in particular, the investments that upstream operators choose to make. Some means of producing oil cost more than others, and producers continually seek to reduce the marginal cost of production. For example, as recently reported by the Financial Times, studies estimate that the median North American tight oil development needs a crude oil price of $57 per barrel to break even. This threshold price compares to $70 per barrel one year ago. The situation is similar for production from Canadian oil sands, for which the average break-even cost is reportedly between $63 and $65 per barrel. A sustained drop in oil prices may provide a renewed focus on reducing costs and keeping these unconventional projects economically viable.
The implications for long-term projects with costs that cannot be scaled are potentially more worrying.Certain projects — for example, oil field developments, pipeline transportation, or other investments tied to the price of oil, such as LNG liquefaction trains or re-gasification terminals — can be dependent on expected oil and gas prices. When the oil price deviates outside of an anticipated range for an extended period of time, the economics of a project can change and it can create legal disputes (e.g., between co-venturers or between the investment company and supporting service providers). A fluctuating oil price can also encourage a government to change the rules of the game, which can also lead to litigation.
There are ways of mitigating these risks. When circumstances permit, some operators may try to include legal provisions in their contracts that anticipate potential changes in the energy markets, such as hardship clauses that shift some of risk of price changes to others. Frequently, legal disputes center on how these provisions should be applied. Depending on the law of the contract, there may also be legal doctrines that can be of assistance (e.g., bouleversement and imprévision, civil law concepts that can sometimes provide relief in the case of a supervening change in circumstances). Stabilisation clauses and investment treaty protections can sometimes be relied on to remedy actions taken by the government.
In short, a falling oil price may be helpful for the global economy, but it can create unwanted headaches for participants in the oil and gas sector and, potentially, give rise to litigation.
/gazprom.com/press/news/2014/jone/article3194/'>>Gazprom 和ahrf='http://www.naftogaz.com/www/3/nakweben.nsf/0/419E3C3C184862C2257CFA3426?OpenDocument&y=2014&month=News&'>Naftogaz KP日期为2009年1月19日(“契约”),Gazprom和Naftogaz之间10年长期天然气销售协议,量从每年400至520亿立方公尺不等。依据各方发布的声明,Gazprom似乎将提出债务索赔。Naftogaz似有可能引用物价审查规定并求降价争议值超过45亿美元。
解决争议,法庭可能需要考虑合同中的价格审查规定定价条件和物价审查规定保密,很少披露ahrfss.com/heren/articles/2009/01/30/9309445-2-separate-contracts-were假设Ukrainskayapravda所公布的合同包含与Naftogaz和Gazprom当前仲裁相关的物价审查规定,则法庭需要解释一些异常条件。
Ukrainskayapravda发布合同中的价格审查规定要求仲裁庭判定燃料和能源产品市场是否有实质性变化契约似未明文定义市场法庭需要确定哪些市场数据应评估以确定是否有实质性变化定义市场可能会引起争议Gazprom提供几乎全部进口天然气,乌克兰已开始实现能源供应多样化一些欧洲能源公司最近开始通过波兰和匈牙利向乌克兰提供逆流气来自乌克兰境外市场的数据可能相关仲裁庭需要判定是否允许根据物价审查条款考虑乌克兰境外市场的数据 。
Ukrainskayapravda发布合同条件还要求仲裁庭判定物价公式产生的价格是否反映“市场价”。合同没有具体说明确定市场价格的任何方法万博体育app手机登录简言之,Ukrainskaya Pravda发布的价格审查条款为法庭提供了很少引导和极大程度的裁量权。这使过程更加复杂并有可能增加结果不确定性签订长期天然气供应合同的各方应认真注意从中可汲取的教益。
.适当考虑物价审查规定是关键,有助于限制物价审查仲裁中的不确定性。关于现代长期天然气供应协议中起草选项及其他定价和争端解决考虑的更多信息,.s/p>现下文对现代长期天然气供应协议中定价规定结构提出一些想法。复杂定价规定是长期商品合同的共同特征在长期天然气销售协议中,协议条件定价通常不切实际,因为价格随时间推移而变化的竞争力没有一个单一定价术语或指数可供各方通用参考正因如此,各方通常会商定一个包含数变量的定值物价公式公式变量由双方在合同谈判期间商定可变量可表示替代能源、中心价、系数以抵消通货膨胀影响或降低汇风险或各方认为可能影响协议下售天然气价值的任何其他因素。
没有标准物价审查条款,规定的范围和效果因合同而异差异很大变化原因多有,从所涉方背景到相关天然气市场环境不等。但尽管没有锅炉板定价规定,但有一些泛泛趋势。通常只允许当事方在合同有效期内某些时段和/或数次启动物价审查举例说,许多长期天然气供应合同具体规定,任何一方只能每三年启动一次价格审查。部分协议还将包括数量有限的附加物价审查,缔约方可在任何时候启动整个协议期(有时称作“jokers”)。物价审查条款除限制一方启动物价审查外,还常常要求当事方说明需要物价审查的理由这有时被称为“触发器”。可要求一方证明发生了“重大变化”,相关能源市场发生了有意义的变化或公式产生的价位为“市场外”。
E万博体育app手机登录物价审查规定有时为这一点提供指导并列出客观测试或标准拟满足举例说,有些协议要求一方证明价格公式不再产生“可市场化价格”,并显示拟议修订价格公式将如何更好地满足这一指标。
推理,价格审查条款还包含试图限制定价争议范围的措辞。举例说,由于气值因市场而异,有时混淆市场数据应考虑在某些合同中,价格审查规定指示当事人只考虑特定能源市场的变化(无论是区域或国家)。缔约方有时还包含术语识别物价公式的意向或目的并明确说明选择某些变量的原因举例说,合同条件可具体规定煤价指数化意在表示电力市场竞用能源或燃料油指数化意在表示工业市场竞用能源万博体育app手机登录值得注意的是,随着欧洲天然气市场自由化的进展并产生天然气对天然气竞争,价格公式和价格审查规定日益常见地明确指中产物和自由化的影响。
长期天然气供应合同方面临的挑战是商定价格审查条件,这些条件泛泛足以适应市场意外变化,但具体性足以向当事方或仲裁庭提供足够指导各种选项可供选择,各方的写法选择可影响未来定价争议的规模和复杂性。适当考虑物价审查规定是关键并可有助于限制物价审查仲裁中的不确定性。