CNOOC PETROLEUM NORTH AMERICA ULC v ITP SA

This is a Costs Decision arising from an underlying Decision in this Action. Associate Chief Justice Nixon noted that the Court has general discretion pursuant to Rules 10.31 and 10.33 to issue a Costs Award and that the default Rule pursuant to Rule 10.29(1) awards the successful party Costs.

The Court held that pursuant to Rule 10.31(1), the Trial Judge holds considerable discretion in determining what constitutes reasonable and proper Costs. CNOOC was the successful party in the underlying Decision, and thus, was entitled to Costs. Wood Group, the unsuccessful party, did not challenge this. Wood Group did disagree, however, with CNOOC that there should be multiple sets of Costs awarded.

CNOOC had several affiliated entities represented by the same firm and thus requested separate Costs for each of the three parties. Wood Group relied on Rules 1.2(2)(b) and 14.32 in support of their argument that multiple Costs Awards were not appropriate.

Nixon A.C.J. disagreed with Wood Group, finding that Rule 14.32 was in no way instructive in this matter. The Court directed that the appropriate Costs Award was for each of the CNOOC affiliated entities to be awarded Costs at 4 times Column 5 of Schedule C. Associate Chief Justice Nixon determined this was appropriate given that each of the three CNOOC affiliated entities submitted their own responding Briefs based on their specific circumstances.