Can force majeure apply against enforcement of bank guarantees? The Delhi High Court’s analysis

by | Dec 14, 2020

Halliburton Offshore Services Incorporated (Petitioner) and Vedanta Limited (Respondent) had entered into a contract for the development of three oilfields. The Petitioner had undertaken to complete the drilling of the oil wells by 31 March 2020. However, on 22 March 2020, the Petitioner sought an extension of the timeline, citing the Covid-19 pandemic and the resultant lockdown imposed by the government of Rajasthan from 22 March to 31 March 2020, which was subsequently extended throughout India. The Respondent rejected the Petitioner’s argument and sought to invoke the bank guarantees given by the Petitioner for breach of contract. The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court (Delhi HC) seeking an injunction against the invocation of the bank guarantees.

The Respondent argued:

  • that an invocation of a bank guarantee is a separate matter and is not affected by any disputes that may arise out of the non-performance of any obligation by either party;
  • that a court can issue an injunction only on the invocation of a bank guarantee in circumstances where the bank fulfilling the guarantee is aware of an egregious fraud being committed on account of paying under the bank guarantee; and
  • that the Petitioner was merely using force majeure as an excuse after failing to adhere to the deadlines of the project.

The Petitioner argued:

  • that the Respondent had agreed to 31 March 2020 as the deadline for completing the work, and that a very small part of the work was still pending on 22 March 2020;
  • that an injunction on the invocation of bank guarantees can be sought on the ground of special equity to prevent irreparable damage to the debtor;
  • that the Petitioner would suffer irreparable harm if the bank guarantees were invoked; and
  • that the timeframe of the injunction on the invocation of the bank guarantees was very limited (only until one week after the lockdown was lifted by the Rajasthan government).

A big part of adjusting to the new normal in the context of commercial contracts is understanding the operation of force majeure clauses.

This update by Akil Hirani, Managing Partner at Majmudar & Partners explains whether force majeure applies against enforcement of bank guarantees based on the case of Halliburton Offshore Services Incorporated v. Vedanta Limited. The update has been published by the International Bar Association

Read the full update here.

More News

ITR World Tax Leaders 2023

Akil Hirani, Managing Partner (tax controversy), and Ravi S. Raghavan, Partner - Tax (indirect tax, tax controversy), have been ranked as 'Highly Regarded' lawyers in the ITR World Tax Leaders rankings for 2023. Congratulations.

read more

Majmudar & Partners IFLR Rankings 32nd Edition

Majmudar & Partners has been recognized among the IFLR1000 for its 32nd Edition in various fields of practice and across sectors. The firm has been ranked for its excellence in practice areas such as M&A, private equity, banking, project finance, capital...

read more

Akil Hirani quoted by The Economic Times on the NDTV takeover

The Adani Group recently announced that its media unit was set to buy a majority stake in NDTV. Akil Hirani, Managing Partner and Head of Transactions Practice, was quoted by The Economic Times on the topic. "NDTV can adopt the classic takeover defence of bringing in...

read more

India – Insolvency Update

In the case of Somesh Choudhary v. Knight Riders Sports Private Limited & Ors, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has held that claims arising from the grant of an exclusive right and license to use intellectual property rights falls...

read more

India – Employment Update

Under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, normally, the termination of a fixed term contract does not elicit payment of retrenchment compensation to the contractual worker, unlike the termination of an open-ended employment agreement. In the recent case of Jamnagar...

read more