United States: Midstream Gathering Agreements Rejected In Sabine Oil & Gas Bankruptcy

Kenneth Noble is a Partner in Holland & Knight's Boston office

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • The Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York determined on March 8, 2016, that midstream gathering agreements are subject to rejection as executory contracts, based on the debtor's business judgment, to the extent the agreements do not create an interest in property. The court then determined in a "non-binding analysis" that the midstream gathering agreements at issue in Sabine did not create an interest in property under Texas law because as drafted, and despite language to the contrary in the agreements, they did not create "covenants that run with the land" or equitable servitudes.
  • While Sabine did not resolve the treatment of midstream gathering agreements in bankruptcy, which may vary based on the actual language used and applicable state law, the decision may prove influential to other courts, particularly if presented with similarly drafted agreements governed by Texas law, and may create a more favorable environment for upstream operators seeking to renegotiate the economic terms of their gathering agreements.
  • In the meantime, and pending any subsequent decisions on this issue in the Quicksilver Resources and Magnum Hunter Resources bankruptcy cases pending in the District of Delaware, parties with an economic interest in midstream gathering agreements may be well advised to evaluate such agreements in light of the analysis provided in the Sabine decision.

In a much anticipated ruling from the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Shelley C. Chapman determined that midstream gathering agreements are subject to rejection as executory contracts, based on the debtor's business judgment, to the extent those agreements do not create an interest in property. The court then determined in a "non-binding analysis" that the midstream gathering agreements at issue did not create an interest in property under Texas law because as drafted, and despite language to the contrary in the agreements, they did not create "covenants that run with the land" or equitable servitudes.1

Gathering agreements generally provide that an energy and production company (upstream operator) agrees to pay certain amounts over a specified number of years, subject to certain minimum volume or payment requirements, to a gathering and processing company (midstream operator) to treat and transport oil and gas products from the well or extraction point to a refining company (downstream operator). In exchange, the midstream operator agrees to pay the upfront cost of building the necessary pipelines and treatment facilities with the expectation that those agreements would survive a bankruptcy of the upstream operator.

The critical legal issue with respect to such a gathering agreement relates to whether it constitutes an executory contract that is subject to rejection in bankruptcy by the upstream operator based on the exercise of its business judgment or, instead, constitutes an interest in real property that attaches to the upstream operator's mineral estate and continues (or runs) with the land, unaffected by the bankruptcy.

The decision in Sabine does not resolve this critical legal issue given that the court's substantive analysis, by its terms, is non-binding (even on the parties to the case) and is limited to the application of Texas law to the actual provisions of the gathering agreements at issue in this case. However, the court's analysis may prove influential to other courts and create support for upstream operators seeking to renegotiate more favorable economic terms with respect to their gathering agreements.

The court's determination in Sabine that the midstream gathering agreements at issue did not create covenants that run with the land or equitable servitudes is not subject to appeal, given that the determination constituted "non-binding analysis." However, the treatment of gathering agreements in bankruptcy is also at issue in two other bankruptcy cases that are currently pending in the District of Delaware, Quicksilver Resources (Bankruptcy Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein) and Magnum Hunter Resources (Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross). Decisions in those cases are anticipated in the near future.

Background

On July 15, 2015, Sabine Oil & Gas Company, an upstream energy company engaged in the exploration and production of onshore oil and natural gas in Texas, filed for bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York. Prior to filing, Sabine had entered into three gathering agreements which provided, among other things, that Sabine would dedicate all of the oil and gas produced from certain designated areas, subject to specified minimums, to certain midstream operators. The midstream operators, in turn, agreed to construct at their sole expense certain pipelines and treatment facilities that they would then use to gather and process the oil and gas received from Sabine. Each of the agreements provided that it was governed by Texas law and constituted a "covenant running with the land."

On September 30, 2015, Sabine filed a motion under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code seeking to reject the three gathering agreements as executory contracts. Sabine argued that rejection was a reasonable exercise of its business judgment because the agreements required the delivery of certain minimum amounts of gas and related products, which was unduly burdensome. Sabine also indicated that if rejection was authorized it would seek to enter into replacement gathering agreements with other midstream operators on more favorable terms.

The midstream operators opposed the motion and argued, among other things, that the gathering agreements constituted covenants that ran with the land, or equitable servitudes, that could not be rejected in bankruptcy. The operators also argued that any action to challenge those covenants could not be done in the context of a motion to reject, which is summary proceeding, but could only be done in the context of a separate adversary proceeding or contested matter to determine the substantive issues relating to those covenants.

Applicable Bankruptcy Provisions

The substantive protections provided to a midstream operator vary significantly depending on whether the gathering agreement constitutes an executory contract, which is subject to Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, or instead creates an interest in property of the debtor (such as a covenant that runs with the land or an equitable servitude), which is subject to Section 363(f) of the Code.

Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides, among other things, that a debtor can reject an executory contract, subject to bankruptcy court approval, if the contract is unduly burdensome to the debtor's estate, irrespective of the adverse impact that rejection may have on the non-debtor party. Courts generally defer to the debtor's exercise of its business judgment in determining whether to permit rejection of an executory contract, absent a showing that the debtor's decision was based on bad faith, whim or caprice. The non-debtor party to a rejected contract, in turn, receives an unsecured claim against the debtor's estate for breach of contract damages.

Conversely, Section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a debtor may not sell its property free and clear of an interest in that property held by a non-debtor entity, subject to limited exceptions if (i) the sale is consented to by the holder of the interest, (ii) a sale free and clear of the interest is otherwise permitted under non-bankruptcy law, (iii) the interest is a lien and the sale price is greater than the value of the lien, (iv) the holder of the interest could be compelled under non-bankruptcy law to accept the payment of money or (v) the validity of the underlying interest is subject to a bona fide dispute. If the property is not sold free and clear of the interest, then the non-debtor entity continues to hold its interest in the property unaffected by the debtor's bankruptcy case.

The procedural protections provided to a non-debtor entity may also vary depending on whether the entity is party to an executory contract, which can be resolved by motion in a summary proceeding as a contested matter under Bankruptcy Rule 9014, or instead holds an interest in property of the debtor, which is subject to resolution in a more formal adversary proceeding commenced by complaint under Bankruptcy Rule 7001 (absent consent by the non-debtor party to proceed as a contested matter).

Bankruptcy Court Decision

On March 8, 2016, Bankruptcy Judge Chapman issued the court's decision with respect to the treatment of the gathering agreements at issue in the Sabine bankruptcy case. The decision did not resolve the substantive legal issues that had been raised, but instead created a basis for Sabine to seek to renegotiate its gathering agreements on more favorable terms.

The court first determined that Sabine's decision to reject the gathering agreements was, to the extent those agreements constituted executory contracts, a reasonable exercise of its business judgment, and in the best interest of the estate, because they were unnecessarily burdensome. In reaching its decision, the court noted that one of the midstream operators had acknowledged during oral argument that rejection of the agreements was reasonable and that neither midstream operator had put forward any argument or evidence that Sabine's decision was based on bad faith, whim or caprice.

Next, the court agreed that, as a procedural matter, it could not decide the underlying substantive legal issues with respect to whether the gathering agreements constituted covenants that run with the land, or equitable servitudes, in the context of a motion to dismiss, but would instead require Sabine to commence a separate adversary proceeding or contested matter to obtain such a decision.

The court then went on to set forth its "non-binding analysis" as to whether the gathering agreements constituted covenants that run with the land or equitable servitudes. Initially, the court noted that the agreements were governed by Texas law and there is no binding decision on this issue by the Texas Supreme Court.

The court then found that the gathering agreements as drafted failed to satisfy two of the "arcane and anachronistic" requirements necessary to establish a covenant that runs with the land. First, the agreements as drafted failed to satisfy the requirement that the parties have "horizontal privity of estate" because Sabine had not reserved an interest in real property for the midstream operators in the context of a traditional conveyance. Moreover, Sabine had not granted an interest to the operators in the underlying mineral estate, but had instead only granted them the contractual right to gather and process gas, which was not a recognized interest in real property under Texas law. Second, the agreements as drafted failed to satisfy the requirement (also applicable to create an equitable servitude) that they "touch and concern" the underlying mineral estate because they related solely to gas and products after they had been extracted from the ground, at which point they ceased to be real property and instead became personal property.

Finally, the court invited the midstream operators to file any claims against the debtor's estate that they believed were consistent with their legal rights so that those claims could, in turn, be promptly resolved by motion through the debtor's claim administration process.

Conclusion

While the decision in Sabine did not resolve the critical underlying legal issue with respect to the treatment of gathering agreements in bankruptcy, the court's decision may prove influential to other courts, particularly if presented with similarly drafted agreements governed by Texas law, and may create a more favorable environment for upstream operators seeking to renegotiate the economic terms of their gathering agreements.

In the meantime, and pending any subsequent decisions in the Quicksilver Resources and Magnum Hunter Resources bankruptcy cases, parties with an interest in midstream gathering agreements may be well advised to evaluate such agreements in light of the analysis provided in the Sabine decision.

Footnote

1. In re Sabine Oil & Gas Corp., Case No. 15-11835 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. March 8, 2016) [Doc. #872].

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 Mondaq.com.

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

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions