We use cookies for analytics to improve your experience. Privacy Policy
Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar control approximately 25% of global proven hydrocarbon reserves — and the contracts governing those reserves must be engineered for the world that will exist in 20 years, not the world that existed when they were signed.
Saudi Aramco's IKTVA programme raised its minimum local content scoring threshold to 70% for new contract awards in 2024, while ADNOC's ICV system introduced real-time scoring verification — companies that were compliant last year may not be eligible this year.
GCC governments periodically revise upstream fiscal terms, royalty rates, and local content obligations. Stabilisation clauses that were adequate a decade ago may not protect against the specific type of regulatory change that has since occurred. A concession that was commercially viable under the original fiscal regime can be rendered uneconomic by a royalty adjustment — without the IOC having any contractual remedy if the stabilisation clause does not cover the specific change.
The 2022 European energy crisis and subsequent Red Sea shipping disruptions generated force majeure disputes in LNG long-term SPAs that tested contract provisions never previously litigated. A force majeure clause not drafted to cover shipping route disruption cannot be invoked when the Strait of Hormuz or Red Sea becomes impassable — leaving the seller liable for full take-or-pay obligations.
Long-duration upstream agreements are being renegotiated against carbon commitments and ESG obligations. The legal framework for unilateral exit from upstream concessions is creating stranded asset risk for both host governments and IOCs. The contracts that were signed for a 30-year hydrocarbon world must now perform in a world where the energy mix is shifting every 5 years.
Saudi Aramco's IKTVA programme and ADNOC's ICV system create scoring-based eligibility requirements embedded in contract award decisions. The scoring methodology changes; the eligibility cut-offs shift. An IKTVA score that falls below Aramco's threshold does not just affect the next contract — it affects every existing relationship with Aramco until the score recovers.
What's at stake
A production sharing agreement that does not contain an adequate stabilisation clause can be rendered commercially unviable by a royalty change — without the IOC having any legal remedy under the governing law.
A force majeure clause in an LNG SPA that was not drafted to cover shipping route disruption cannot be invoked when the Strait of Hormuz becomes impassable — leaving the seller liable for full take-or-pay payments that can exceed USD 500 million per annum.
A joint operating agreement that does not address the default of a non-operator participant in a cost-sharing regime leaves the operator funding the defaulting party's share indefinitely — or triggering cross-default provisions in the defaulting party's financing.
An IKTVA score that falls below Aramco's threshold does not just affect the next contract — it affects every existing relationship with Aramco across the Kingdom until the score recovers.
Industry challenges
These are the issues that keep decision-makers in your industry awake at night. We hear them every week — and we know how to fix them.
The host government revised upstream royalty rates under a new petroleum law. Your concession's stabilisation clause freezes the 'fiscal regime' but the government argues that royalty rates are regulatory, not fiscal. The distinction between economic equilibrium clauses, freezing clauses, and hybrid stabilisation models determines whether you have any remedy at all.
Project IRR drops from 18% to 9% overnight. Renegotiation from a position of weakness typically takes 18–36 months and results in concessions on other terms. Without adequate stabilisation, the full loss is unrecoverable.
The buyer invoked force majeure under a 20-year LNG SPA citing shipping route disruption. Your SPA's force majeure clause lists 'war, blockade, and embargo' but does not specifically reference shipping route unavailability. The buyer argues impossibility; you argue the cargo can be rerouted at additional cost — which is hardship, not force majeure.
Take-or-pay exposure of USD 200–500 million per annum while the dispute is resolved. ICC arbitration of LNG force majeure claims typically takes 18–24 months to reach an award, during which the seller bears the full volume risk.
Under the AIPN 2012 model JOA, a non-operator who fails to meet a cash call triggers default provisions that may allow the operator to fund the shortfall. But the default penalty (typically 200–300% of the defaulted amount) requires pursuit against a party that may be insolvent. Meanwhile, the operation continues and the operator's share of costs increases.
Immediate cash outlay of the defaulting party's share — which on a major upstream development can exceed USD 50–100 million per cash call. Recovery through the default penalty mechanism typically takes 12–24 months and is contingent on the defaulting party's solvency.
Aramco's IKTVA programme requires minimum local content scores for contract eligibility. The scoring methodology was updated in 2024, reclassifying certain categories of local expenditure. Your company's score dropped from 72% to 64% — below the 70% threshold for new awards — without any change in your actual operations.
Exclusion from all new Aramco contract awards until the score recovers. For companies with 60–80% of revenue from Aramco contracts, this represents potential revenue loss of SAR 500 million to SAR 2 billion during the remediation period, which typically requires 6–12 months.
Don't let these problems compound.
Let's solve them together.
We negotiate and draft PSAs, concession agreements, and risk service contracts with host governments across the Gulf and North Africa. Our work covers cost recovery mechanisms, profit oil/gas splits (R-factor and progressive), ring-fencing provisions, domestic market obligations, stabilisation clauses (freezing, economic equilibrium, and hybrid models), and dispute resolution frameworks — typically ICSID or ICC — that determine where sovereign disputes are resolved.
We advise on offtake agreements, pipeline transportation and capacity reservation agreements, gas processing contracts, refinery construction and operation agreements, and storage facility arrangements. Our downstream work addresses the specific commercial structures of GCC refining and petrochemical operations, including feedstock supply agreements, product offtake, and the tolling arrangements common in Saudi and UAE refining.
We structure LNG sale and purchase agreements with FOB and DES/DAP delivery terms, destination clauses, take-or-pay and deliver-or-pay obligations, price review mechanisms (oil-indexed and hub-based), diversion rights, and the force majeure provisions that have become the most contested clauses in the global LNG market since 2022.
We represent IOCs, NOCs, and service companies in arbitrations under ICC, LCIA, SCC, ICSID, and UNCITRAL Rules. Our caseload covers concession disputes, JOA deadlocks, cost audit challenges, cash call defaults, oilfield services liability (knock-for-knock indemnity interpretation), take-or-pay claims, and gas pricing arbitrations.
We advise on Aramco IKTVA programme compliance, ADNOC ICV scoring, and the interaction between local content obligations and contract eligibility. Our work includes IKTVA score optimisation strategies, ICV audit preparation, supply chain restructuring to increase local content, and dispute resolution where scoring methodology changes affect existing contractual relationships.
It depends on how 'fiscal regime' is defined in the concession and which governing law applies. Under most GCC petroleum laws, royalties are classified as sovereign regulatory instruments, not fiscal measures — meaning a narrow stabilisation clause that freezes the 'fiscal regime' may not protect against royalty changes. Economic equilibrium clauses provide broader protection by requiring the host government to restore the economic balance of the concession regardless of the legal characterisation of the change. We analyse the specific clause language against the governing law to determine your actual protection.
Force majeure clauses in most LNG SPAs require the event to make performance impossible, not merely more expensive. Shipping route disruption that increases costs but allows rerouting is typically classified as hardship, not force majeure. However, if the SPA specifically lists 'shipping route unavailability' or 'blockade' as a force majeure event, the analysis changes. The distinction between impossibility and increased cost has been tested in several ICC arbitrations since 2022, with tribunals reaching different conclusions based on clause wording.
The IKTVA scoring methodology is set by Aramco and is not subject to judicial review in Saudi courts. However, the contractual consequences of a score drop — exclusion from new awards, potential impact on existing contracts — can be challenged if the methodology change was not contemplated by the contract's local content provisions. Practical remediation includes supply chain restructuring, local manufacturing investment, and workforce localisation — typically requiring 6–12 months to restore scoring above the threshold.
Under the AIPN 2012 model JOA, a defaulting non-operator faces penalty interest (typically 200–300% of the defaulted amount), forfeiture of production entitlements, and ultimately compulsory transfer of its participating interest. The operator can elect to fund the shortfall or suspend operations. The practical challenge is that default enforcement takes 12–24 months and requires that the defaulting party has assets to satisfy the penalty — which is often not the case when the default is caused by insolvency.
Exit requires host government consent (which is never automatic), partner pre-emption rights under the JOA (typically 30–60 days), decommissioning liability allocation (which survives the transfer in most GCC jurisdictions), and tax structuring across the holding chain. The most common obstacle is government consent — which can take 6–18 months and may be conditional on the incoming party meeting specific technical and financial criteria that the government sets unilaterally.
GSDA restructured our stabilisation clause before the government's fiscal reform. When the royalty change came, we were the only IOC in the concession area with a contractual remedy. That single clause saved us over USD 300 million.
VP Legal — International Oil Company, Gulf Operations
Insights
The GSDA advantage
Offices in Paris, Dubai, and Riyadh — at the crossroads of European energy regulation and Gulf hydrocarbon policy.
Direct experience with Aramco, ADNOC, and QatarEnergy contract frameworks and procurement processes.
Integrated EPC and dispute resolution capability — we handle the contracts that build facilities and the arbitrations that resolve disputes.
Trilingual team operating in English, French, and Arabic — essential for negotiations with Gulf and North African host governments.
Combined upstream, midstream, and downstream expertise, including LNG force majeure disputes arising from the 2022–2024 market disruption.
Knowledge hub