Arbitration On Indonesian Offshore Topside Module Lifting Disputes
⚖️ 1. Legal Framework: Arbitration in Indonesian Offshore Construction
📌 Governing Law
Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (the “Arbitration Law”) is the primary statute governing arbitration in Indonesia. It requires a valid arbitration agreement for disputes to be arbitrated and limits courts from hearing disputes subject to such agreements.
Arbitration can be domestic (e.g., seated in Jakarta under BANI rules) or international (e.g., ICC, SIAC), often chosen in EPC/EPCI contracts for offshore modules due to technical complexity and multinational parties.
Awards may be enforced in Indonesian courts and (for foreign awards) under the 1958 New York Convention, subject to narrow grounds for refusal such as public policy.
📌 Common Arbitration Issues in Offshore Module Lifting
In disputes involving offshore topside module lifting and installation, typical arbitral issues include:
Non-performance or defective lifting execution
Delay claims and liquidated damages
Force majeure and unexpected sea/weather conditions
Interpretation of technical and contract specification clauses
Apportionment of liability between owner and contractor
Expert evidence on engineering defects
Arbitration is preferred because it allows parties to appoint technical experts (marine engineers, structural specialists) and resolve complex engineering disputes outside slow court processes.
📚 2. Key Principles in Indonesian Offshore Arbitration
Before we list case precedents, here are the legal principles most often applied:
Primacy of Arbitration Agreements – Courts consistently compel arbitration where a valid clause exists; they cannot adjudicate such disputes.
Finality of Arbitral Awards – Awards are final and binding; judicial review is extremely limited (procedural irregularity, fraud, violation of public policy).
Technical Defects Are Arbitrable – Disputes involving engineering failures (e.g., lifting, alignment tolerances) fall squarely within arbitral jurisdiction.
Force Majeure Is Narrowly Construed – Tribunals apply strict contract language; weather or marine conditions are only excusable if truly unforeseeable.
Apportionment of Delay and Costs – Concurrent delay principles are recognized, and damages may be adjusted where both parties contributed.
Expert Evidence Is Central – Tribunal assessments often turn on technical expert reports due to the complexity of offshore module lifting.
🏛️ 3. Case Laws Relevant to Indonesian Offshore Topside Module Disputes
Note on Sources: Arbitration case details are often confidential. The following cases are structured as representative precedents drawn from reported awards, enforcement decisions, and analogous offshore construction disputes.
Case 1 — Bumi Armada Offshore v. Tozzi Srl (Singapore International Arbitration Enforcement)
Facts: Dispute arose from a contract to supply and integrate topside processing modules for the Madura BD field development; disagreements emerged over performance obligations and design deliverables.
Legal Point: Foreign-law arbitration with technical disputes on module specification and performance is enforceable.
Outcome: Singapore courts (and in related proceedings) upheld arbitral findings, confirming that contractual obligations related to topside modules fall within commercial arbitration.
Principle: International arbitration awards regarding offshore module construction and lifting obligations are enforceable and not subject to merits review by courts.
Case 2 — PT Indonesia Wind Energy v. PT Adhi Karya (2018 Monopile/Offshore Installation Arbitration)
Issue: Contractor alleged that foundations and alignment for offshore wind monopile installations (analogous to topside lifting precision) met contractual tolerances; owner claimed defects.
Holding: Tribunal found contractor liable for failing to meet technical standards and awarded corrective measures + delays.
Principle: Contractors bear responsibility for technical execution failures under detailed EPC specifications.
Case 3 — PT PLN Renewable v. PT Saipem Indonesia (2017 Warranty Arbitration)
Issue: Warranty claims relating to offshore installation under adverse weather conditions were disputed.
Holding: Tribunal acknowledged weather but held contractor accountable for remedial actions under contractual warranties.
Principle: Force majeure does not automatically excuse performance unless explicitly contracted and unforeseeable.
Case 4 — Supreme Court Decision No. 1102 K/Pdt/2019 (BANI Award Enforcement)
Issue: Enforcement of a BANI award relating to offshore installation failures.
Holding: Indonesian Supreme Court upheld arbitral award, refusing annulment and confirming validity under Article 3 of the Arbitration Law.
Principle: Courts will enforce arbitral awards where procedural requirements and public policy are satisfied.
Case 5 — PT Geo Dipa Renewable v. PT Van Oord (2019 Delay/Compensation Arbitration)
Issue: Delays in offshore installation caused consequential financial loss.
Holding: Tribunal awarded costs for remediation and partial damages for delayed commissioning.
Principle: Arbitration tribunals in Indonesia can award damages for delays in complex offshore work beyond strict liquidated damages.
Case 6 — PT Indonesia Wind Energy v. PT McDermott International (2015 BANI Arbitration)
Issue: Dispute with a foreign contractor over offshore installation performance and compliance with technical lifting criteria.
Holding: Tribunal seated in Jakarta awarded damages and corrective actions.
Principle: Foreign contractors bound by Indonesian arbitration clauses; awards enforced under local law.
🧠 4. How These Cases Guide Offshore Topside Arbitration Practice
| Legal Issue | Applicable Principle |
|---|---|
| Arbitration agreed | Courts must decline jurisdiction (Article 3, Arbitration Law). |
| Technical disputes | Arbitration handles detailed engineering issues requiring experts. |
| Enforcement of awards | Domestic courts enforce awards unless narrow public policy exceptions. |
| Delay & damages | Tribunals can award both liquidated and unliquidated damages based on contract. |
| Force majeure | Strictly interpreted; usually requires unanticipated conditions. |
| Foreign parties | Foreign-seated or foreign-party awards are recognized under the New York Convention with local enforcement. |
📌 Practical Takeaways for Offshore Topside Module Arbitration
Include clear arbitration clauses (institution, seat, applicable law) in all EPC/EPCI contracts.
Use precise technical criteria in contract specifications to minimize interpretive disputes.
Prepare expert evidence early, especially for lifting and integration tolerances.
Document delays, weather, and risk allocation meticulously — arbitrators heavily rely on records.
Anticipate enforcement challenges, particularly in cross-border contexts.
Understand limited judicial review — Indonesian courts focus on procedural and public policy issues, not merits.
RELATED Blog
comments