A US$3.2bn gas-supply arbitration.
- 01$3.2bnAmount in dispute
- 024Expert reports filed
- 0312 daysEvidentiary hearing
- 04ICCArbitral institution
Our team was appointed by respondent’s counsel to assess damages arising from an alleged breach of a long-term gas-supply agreement—a matter turning on price-review economics and the counterfactual path of a volatile market.
The question
The claim rested on a contractual price-review mechanism and the economic effect of a market dislocation. The tribunal needed a damages figure it could defend against two competing counterfactuals, each sensitive to a handful of forward-curve assumptions.
Our approach
We built an independent model isolating the drivers of loss, stress-tested each assumption against contemporaneous market data, and expressed the result as a range with clearly attributed sensitivities rather than a single contested point estimate.
The evidence
Two of our experts gave concurrent evidence over three sessions. The model’s transparency allowed the tribunal to vary assumptions live and observe the effect on quantum, narrowing the dispute to a small set of decidable questions.
The outcome
The award adopted the structure of our analysis. While the confidential result cannot be disclosed, counsel credited the clarity of the model with reshaping the posture of the proceedings.
A range the tribunal can test is worth more than a point estimate it has to take on trust.