Disputes Over Defective Offshore Platform And Subsea Construction
Disputes Over Defective Offshore Platform and Subsea Construction
1. Nature of the Conflicts
Offshore platform and subsea projects involve complex engineering, harsh environmental conditions, and high-value investments. Defects in construction or installation can lead to:
Structural failures or compromised platform integrity.
Subsea pipeline leaks, riser failures, or anchoring issues.
Operational shutdowns, production losses, or safety hazards.
Environmental damage and regulatory penalties.
Claims for repair costs, delays, and contractual liquidated damages.
Key parties include oil and gas operators, EPC contractors, subsea equipment suppliers, installation contractors, engineering consultants, insurers, and regulatory authorities.
2. Common Causes of Defective Offshore/Subsea Construction
Design flaws or inadequate engineering analysis.
Substandard materials or fabrication defects.
Improper installation or commissioning procedures.
Harsh environmental conditions exceeding design assumptions.
Corrosion, erosion, or fatigue failures not addressed by maintenance plans.
Coordination failures among multiple contractors and subcontractors.
Illustrative Case Laws
Case 1: Offshore Operator vs Platform EPC Contractor
Facts: Structural defects discovered in platform legs after fabrication and partial installation, raising stability concerns.
Dispute: Breach of contract, safety risk, and remedial responsibility.
Outcome: Tribunal held EPC contractor liable; ordered reinforcement of platform structure at contractor’s cost and compensation for project delays.
Case 2: Subsea Pipeline Owner vs Subsea Installation Contractor
Facts: Pipeline misalignment and faulty welding caused leaks during hydrostatic testing.
Dispute: Liability for defective installation and repair costs.
Outcome: Contractor held responsible; mandated replacement of defective sections and reimbursement of testing and downtime expenses.
Case 3: Oil Company vs Riser and Equipment Supplier
Facts: Subsea risers and control umbilicals failed prematurely due to material defects.
Dispute: Breach of warranty and contractual performance guarantees.
Outcome: Supplier liable for replacement, remedial works, and compensation for lost production.
Case 4: Offshore Platform Operator vs Multi-Disciplinary Contractor
Facts: Poor coordination between structural, MEP, and subsea contractors led to multiple installation defects.
Dispute: Apportionment of liability for defects and delays.
Outcome: Tribunal apportioned liability among contractors based on scope; corrective works and penalties imposed accordingly.
Case 5: Deepwater Project Owner vs Engineering Consultant
Facts: Design errors in platform jacket and topside load calculations led to excessive stress and potential failure.
Dispute: Professional negligence claim.
Outcome: Consultant partially liable; redesign required and cost-sharing for remedial measures agreed.
Case 6: Offshore Operator vs Subsea SCADA and Control System Supplier
Facts: Defective subsea control system caused monitoring failures, delayed response to leaks, and risked environmental damage.
Dispute: Breach of contract and liability for operational risk.
Outcome: Supplier required to replace defective systems, implement testing protocols, and compensate for penalties and downtime.
Key Takeaways
Offshore and subsea projects involve multiple high-risk interfaces, making defects costly and dangerous.
Warranties, performance guarantees, and defects liability periods are crucial in contracts.
Liability is often shared between contractors, suppliers, and consultants due to overlapping responsibilities.
Independent inspections, testing, and expert reports are essential in dispute resolution.
Timely reporting and proper documentation of defects influence the outcome of claims.
Financial remedies include rectification costs, liquidated damages, production loss compensation, and regulatory penalties.
RELATED Blog
comments