You have to assume that contract law will be upheld. (It is not rugby where the video ref asks the ref if wants to disallow the try because of a prior infringement that the ref hadn't seen.) IMO this case is going to court to try to get some clarification around force majeure, as a test case. If it weren't for the heavy weights involved they should have been told to not waste this courts time - Just read the words in the contract. The reality is that the parties set the penalties for non-supply at the outset when they agreed a price for the gas, accepting the obvious risk that there was no alternate supply. Any way I haven't jumped ship although sometimes wish I had with the way this "market" works.
TAP Price at posting:
69.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
