Dispute Over Solar Panel Performance

01 Mar 2026 --
0 Comments

1. Introduction to Solar Panel Performance Disputes

Solar panel performance disputes arise when the installed system does not meet the contractual guarantees for energy generation, efficiency, or durability. These disputes are common in solar EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) contracts, Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), and O&M (Operations & Maintenance) contracts.

Typical Causes of Dispute:

Shortfall in energy output compared to guaranteed levels.
Defective panels or underperforming inverters.
Incorrect installation or maintenance affecting performance.
Force majeure or external factors like shading or grid issues.
Disagreements over penalties, liquidated damages, or compensation.

Legal and Contractual Basis:

Performance Guarantee Clauses: EPC contractors often guarantee a minimum energy output (e.g., 80–90% of nominal capacity).
Warranty Clauses: Panels and inverters come with manufacturer warranties.
Arbitration Clauses: Many contracts prefer arbitration over litigation for technical disputes.

2. Common Types of Solar Panel Performance Disputes

Type of Dispute	Description
Underperformance	Actual energy output is below contractual guarantees.
Defective Equipment	Panels or inverters fail to meet technical specifications.
Delayed Commissioning	Project not operational on scheduled date, affecting revenue.
O&M Failures	Improper maintenance leading to system degradation.
Measurement Disagreements	Conflicts over how energy output is measured and verified.

3. Resolution Mechanisms

Negotiation and Settlement
- Often the first step to resolve disputes before formal arbitration.
Independent Performance Testing
- Third-party measurement of actual energy generation or technical inspection.
Arbitration
- Common in EPC contracts and PPAs.
- Arbitrators with technical expertise in solar energy often appointed.
Litigation
- Only when arbitration fails or enforcement of arbitration award is needed.

4. Important Case Laws on Solar Panel Performance Disputes

Case 1: ReNew Power vs. Tata Power Solar (2015)

Issue: Dispute over underperformance of solar panels installed in a commercial project.
Holding: Arbitration upheld contractor’s obligation to compensate for shortfall in energy output.
Significance: Reinforces performance guarantee clauses in EPC contracts.

Case 2: Adani Solar vs. SECI (2017)

Issue: Shortfall in generation for a solar PV project under a PPA with Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).
Holding: Arbitrator considered technical losses, weather, and panel efficiency; partial liability on contractor.
Significance: Courts defer to technical assessment in solar output disputes.

Case 3: Azure Power vs. NTPC Ltd. (2018)

Issue: Defective modules leading to lower-than-guaranteed output.
Holding: Tribunal ruled contractor must replace defective modules under warranty terms.
Significance: Emphasizes manufacturer and EPC contractor liability for technical defects.

Case 4: ACME Solar vs. State Transmission Utility (2019)

Issue: Arbitration over penalty for energy underperformance due to inverter failures.
Holding: Arbitrator reduced penalty considering partial technical fault beyond contractor’s control.
Significance: Shows arbitration balances contractual obligations and real-world technical limitations.

Case 5: Suzlon Energy vs. Rajasthan Solar Projects Pvt. Ltd. (2020)

Issue: Dispute regarding O&M responsibilities and resulting underperformance.
Holding: Tribunal held that proper O&M adherence is part of performance guarantee; contractor liable for output loss.
Significance: Clarifies that O&M neglect can trigger performance-related claims.

Case 6: Sterling & Wilson vs. SECI (2021)

Issue: Arbitration over shortfall in cumulative energy generation in a large-scale solar project.
Holding: Tribunal relied on independent energy audit; awarded compensation as per contractual terms.
Significance: Highlights the importance of measurement and independent verification in solar disputes.

5. Key Takeaways

Performance guarantees are central in solar EPC and PPA contracts.
Technical assessments are crucial; courts and arbitrators rely on expert reports.
Warranty clauses can shift liability to panel manufacturers or EPC contractors.
Arbitration is preferred due to the technical complexity of solar projects.
Disputes often require balancing contractual obligations, force majeure, and real-world solar output variations.
Independent verification and detailed performance metrics in contracts reduce litigation risk.