\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Good article about Clause 9.2 works with 7.6

“The 20-month feud between the Western Hemisphere&rsqu...
Claret passionate philosopher-king
  07/20/25
759144711186508463273
Translucent deranged pistol library
  07/20/25
...
Godawful Knife School Cafeteria
  07/21/25
The clause at the center of the Exxon-Chevron feud involves ...
Claret passionate philosopher-king
  07/20/25
...
Claret passionate philosopher-king
  07/21/25


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: July 20th, 2025 11:42 AM
Author: Claret passionate philosopher-king

“The 20-month feud between the Western Hemisphere’s two most powerful oil companies over the biggest offshore discovery in a generation hinged on a single clause of a contract few people have ever seen.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-20/how-one-clause-sparked-exxon-chevron-feud-that-turned-personal

https://archive.ph/Y4Qbx

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752626&forum_id=2...id.#49116300)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 20th, 2025 11:43 AM
Author: Translucent deranged pistol library

759144711186508463273

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752626&forum_id=2...id.#49116302)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 21st, 2025 10:27 AM
Author: Godawful Knife School Cafeteria



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752626&forum_id=2...id.#49118502)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 20th, 2025 1:54 PM
Author: Claret passionate philosopher-king

The clause at the center of the Exxon-Chevron feud involves a preemption right in a joint operating agreement (JOA) for the Stabroek oil block in Guyana. Specifically, it gave Exxon and its partners (including CNOOC) the right of first refusal if another partner attempted to sell its interest in the oil field.

When Chevron announced its $53 billion acquisition of Hess — which includes Hess’s 30% stake in the Stabroek block — Exxon invoked this clause, arguing that it had the contractual right to match or block the sale of that stake. Chevron and Hess countered that the clause didn’t apply to corporate-level mergers, only to asset-level sales.

This disagreement triggered arbitration and nearly derailed the Chevron-Hess merger. Exxon saw the clause as essential for protecting its investment and operational control in Guyana, while Chevron viewed Exxon’s stance as a strategic move to interfere with a major acquisition.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752626&forum_id=2...id.#49116560)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 21st, 2025 10:26 AM
Author: Claret passionate philosopher-king



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752626&forum_id=2...id.#49118501)