UK: The Relevance Of Market Expert Evidence In Determining Whether A Deal Has Been Done

Last Updated: 26 March 2013
Article by Stuart Shepherd and Jane Fitzgerald

Proton Energy Group SA v. Public Company Orlen Lietuva [2013] EWHC 334 (Comm)

In this case, in the context of an application for summary judgment, the Commercial Court considered whether or not there was a real issue to be tried as to whether a binding contract had been concluded between the parties, based on a review of their negotiations.


Proton Energy Group SA ("Proton"), a Swiss trader of oil and gasoline related products, and Public Company Orlen Lietuva ("Orlen"), a petroleum refining company incorporated in Lithuania, exchanged e-mails regarding the sale and purchase of crude oil mix. The parties accepted that the following exchanges had occurred:

14 June 2012

  • Proton e-mailed Orlen a "firm offer" to sell CIF Butinge, Lithuania 25,000mt +/- 10% in Seller's option of crude oil mix CN27090090, European origin as per the specifications attached, with delivery period at the discharge port during 10-15 July 2012 and at a price based on five quotations after the bill of lading date.
  • E-mail correspondence continued between the parties on the same day, culminating in a one-word e-mail from Orlen stating "Confirmed".

20 June 2012

  • Proton sent Orlen a detailed draft contract for the sale.

20 – 27 June 2012

  • The parties exchanged various e-mails regarding the terms of the contract.

27 June 2012

  • Proton sent Orlen a revised draft contract. By this time, there was at least one issue on which the parties had not agreed: namely, the documents which Proton would be required to present for payment under a proposed documentary letter of credit.

29 June 2012

  • Orlen wrote to Proton to say that it was withdrawing from the negotiations. It did not open any letter of credit and it did not accept the cargo.

2 July 2012

  • Proton notified Orlen that it was accepting Orlen's failures to open a letter of credit or to take delivery of the cargo as repudiatory breaches of contract and was thereby bringing the sale contract to an end.

Proton applied for summary judgment in relation to their claim that a contract had been concluded, such that Orlen were in breach by not opening a letter of credit or taking delivery of the cargo. Summary judgment is a judgment available where the defendant "(a) has no prospect of successfully defending the claim or issue; and (b) there is no other compelling reason why the claim or issue should be disposed of at a trial". Accordingly, the issue for determination by the Commercial Court was whether there was a real (as opposed to a merely fanciful or imaginary) prospect of Orlen successfully defending Proton's claim that the parties had entered into a binding agreement.


The Judge identified the legal principles applicable to the contract formation question before him by reference to the following passage from Lord Clarke's judgment in the Supreme Court in RTS Flexible Systems Ltd. V. Molkerei Alois Müller GmbH & Co. [2010] 1 WLR 753

  • "The general principles are not in doubt. Whether there is a binding contract between the parties and, if so, upon what terms depends upon what they have agreed. It depends not upon their subjective state of mind, but upon a consideration of what was communicated between them by words or conduct, and whether that leads objectively to a conclusion that they intended to create legal relations and had agreed upon all the terms which they regarded or the law requires as essential for the formation of legally binding relations. Even if certain terms of economic or other significance to the parties have not been finalised, an objective appraisal of their words and conduct may lead to the conclusion that they did not intend agreement of such terms to be a precondition to a concluded and legally binding agreement."

Taking the position as at 14 June 2012 first, the Judge considered the evidence and, in particular, the "firm offer" and subsequent e-mail from Proton which concluded "4. Contractual price is fixed per the confirmed offer. All other contractual terms not indicated into the offer shall be discussed and mutually agreed between parties upon contract negotiations" and Orlen's one word response to that e-mail "Confirmed".

The Judge noted that it was clearly the case that the parties understood at this stage that not all contractual terms had been agreed. As a matter of English law, that would not be fatal since a contract will be binding on the parties where it is the parties' intention to enter into contractual relations and they have agreed on the essential terms, even if they leave certain less significant provisions open for future agreement. What matters is the objectively ascertainable intentions; did they intend to be bound even though there were further terms to be agreed?

In assessing the evidence, the Judge took into account the language of the offer (firm and serious); the apparent urgency in the e-mail exchanges (indicating an intention to be bound) in support of the argument that a binding deal had been reached, with the detailed contractual form to follow. He also considered the conduct of the parties subsequent to the alleged "deal" on 14 June, which could be read either as indicating that the parties were merely negotiating the detailed terms of the deal already concluded or that no binding contract had yet come into existence.

Of particular interest in this case was the submission by Orlen of an expert report in relation to the contract formation issue. Orlen engaged an expert, an oil and gas industry participant with experience in the technical, commercial and contractual aspects of the industry, who produced a report opining on whether reasonable participants in the market for crude oil mix would understand that a legally binding contract was concluded between the parties on 14 June 2012 (or by 27 June).

Proton objected to the admission of the expert report, arguing that the evidence was not properly admissible and would not genuinely assist the trial judge (those being the two factors necessary to fulfil the requirements of CPR 35.1 as explained by Aikens J. in JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v. Springwell Navigation Corp. [2007] 1 All ER (Comm) 549, at 553, paragraph 19).

The expert report addressed matters such as the industry expectations as to the effect of the confirmation of a recap in different categories of trades (OTC vs physical trades) between different categories of counterparty (refineries owned by international oil companies, national oil companies and independents). In particular, the expert asserted that, in the market, confirmation of a recap offer is often considered:

  • binding in over the counter paper transactions where no physical delivery is contemplated.
  • binding in contracts for physical delivery where the seller has a long-term mandate to supply a refinery with feedstock.
  • not binding in cases involving sales to a national oil company.
  • not binding when a transaction for the sale and delivery of crude oil mix to a refinery is viewed as a "once-off" event: i.e. as a one-off transaction and not part of a prior course of dealing between the parties.

The expert concluded therefore that Proton's recap dated 14th June 2012 and Orlen's confirmation would not have been understood by reasonable market participants as creating a binding contract because they would have understood Orlen's confirmation to have been subject to contract, without it needing to be said.

The Judge decided that the expert report was properly admissible. He did so on the basis that, in assessing the parties' objective intentions as expressed to each other, their conduct and communications should be considered in light of the relevant background, which may include evidence as to the practices prevailing in that market at the relevant time, if it could be inferred that the parties' intentions were or may have been informed by those practices. He also thought that the evidence would genuinely assist the trial judge in deciding the issue.

The Judge relied heavily (although not solely) on the expert report in coming to his decision that it was clear that there was a real issue to be tried as to whether a legally binding contract was concluded between the parties on 14th June 2012. The Judge dismissed Proton's summary judgment application accordingly.


This judgment is interesting in respect of the Judge's approach to the question of whether a contract had been concluded by the parties at any particular point in time; in particular, his willingness to permit Orlen to adduce evidence to the effect that participants in the relevant industry would have certain expectations as to when a binding contract would be concluded.

The courts have already shown willing to recognise the industry practice of commodity contracts being concluded on main terms, with the parties intending to iron out the finer points of the deal thereafter. This case suggests that the courts are also inclined to hear evidence from industry experts as to the nuances of industry expectations. Whilst theoretically this might appear sensible, establishing a certain market practice through expert evidence is notoriously difficult particularly where, as is often the case, you have two "market" experts saying the complete opposite about such practice.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.