Govt to appeal against arbitration panel rejecting its claim against RIL

  • 1

New Delhi, Aug 1: The government is likely to appeal against a ruling by an international tribunal that rejected its USD 1.55 billion claim against Reliance Industries and its partners for allegedly siphoning gas from deposits they had no right to exploit.
A three-member international arbitration tribunal by a majority vote held that Reliance could contractually produce and sell any gas that might have migrated from adjoining fields of state-owned Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC) into its area and that it was not obligated to seek prior permission of the government for doing so.
With one member dissenting, the panel held that the production sharing contract for eastern offshore KG-D6 fields “does not prohibit but permits” Reliance “to produce and sell gas which migrated into the sub-sea reservoir lying within (its) Contract Area from a source outside the Contract Area”.
And so “there is no question of ‘unjust enrichment’,” it held. Reliance “has not been and will not be unjustly enriched by any production of migrated gas as a result of Petroleum Operations conducted within its Contract Area”.
A senior government official said the oil ministry is studying the arbitration award and would go in for an appeal.
“To my mind, the arbitration award is flawed and one-sided and only remedy left is to go in for an appeal,” he said.
In his dissent note, G S Singhvi said that the PSC prohibits the Reliance and its partners from producing and selling gas which migrated into their sub-sea reservoir from Contract Area of ONGC.
He held that Reliance “unjustly enriched itself by the sale of migrated gas, which did not belong to it and, therefore, it is bound to restore those benefits to the Government”.
In the 107-page order, the arbitration tribunal headed by Singapore-based arbitrator Lawrence G S Boo stated that although Reliance had always accepted that there could be channel continuity between its KG-D6 block and ONGC’s adjoining KG-D5 and IG block, its conduct is consistent with its position that ‘reservoir connectivity’ has not been proven.
Bernard Eder, a former UK High court judge nominated by Reliance, was the other judge who concurred with Boo. Singhvi, a former Supreme Court judge and the government nominee on the panel, wrote a long dissent note.
“The Claimant (Reliance) requires no further express permission to produce and sell any migrated gas that could have come into (its) Contract Area,” the majority judgment held.
On the company not informing the government of a report commissioned by its partner Niko Resources indicating connectivity between KG-D6 and neighbouring blocks of ONGC, the tribunal said “the alleged failure to furnish information if so proven would at best be a breach of the contractual terms of the PSC or at worst attract penal sanctions under the Petroleum and Natural Gas (PNG) Rules”.
“There is no logical nexus between such breach or non-compliance with the claimant’s right to extract gas which might include gas which could have migrated from an area outside the Contract Area. These are distinct and discreet issues,” it said.
The tribunal said though Reliance’s “production of gas would have included gas which had migrated into the reservoir from a source outside the Contract Area”, it is “entitled to all rights granted to it under the PSC and shall be entitled to retain and recover cost petroleum and profit petroleum from the gas so extracted, produced and sold”.
The panel also awarded USD 8.3 million compensation to the three partners.