Excalibur Ventures Llc v Texas Keystone Inc and Others: ComC 28 Jun 2011

The court gave its reasons for the grant of an order restraining the claimant from also pursuing arbitration proceedings at the International Court of Arbitration.
Held: Gloster J was, found on the evidence then before her a strong arguable case that Gulf was not a party to the alleged contract with Excaliburnd described the grounds put forward by Excalibur to assert the contrary as not, at least at that stage, legally or evidentially convincing.

Judges:

Gloster DBE J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1624 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoExcalibur Ventures Llc v Texas Keystone Inc and Others ComC 10-Sep-2013
Excalibur claimed to be entitled to an interest in a number of oil fields in Kurdistan, which are potentially extremely profitable, and of which the Shaikan field is the most important. The claim was for specific performance of a ‘Collaboration . .
CitedExcalibur Ventures Llc v Texas Keystone Inc and Others CA 18-Nov-2016
Excalibur had entered into a conditional fee agreement with its solicitors to suport its intended claim against the respondents. Funders had advanced some andpound;13m to take the mater forward. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Arbitration

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441246