Legal
Update These materials reflect only the personal views of the author and are not individualized legal advice. It is understood that each case is fact-specific, and that the appropriate solution in any case will vary. Therefore, these
materials may or may not be relevant to any particular situation. Thus, the author and their law firm cannot be bound either philosophically or as representatives of their various present and future clients to the comments expressed in these materials. The presentation of these materials does not establish any form of attorney-client relationship with the author or their law firm. While every attempt was made to insure that these materials are accurate, errors or omissions may be contained therein, for which any liability is disclaimed. North Dakota North Dakota Supreme Court Concludes that a Pugh Clause Controls over the Habendum and Continuous Drilling Clauses
In Robert Post Johnson & A.V.M., Inc. v. Statoil Oil & Gas LP, 918 N.W.2d 58 (N.D. 2018), the North Dakota Supreme Court interpreted an oil and gas lease to resolve a conflict between the habendum and continuous drilling clauses and the Pugh clause. The habendum and continuous development clauses were part of a form oil and gas lease and the parties
separately negotiated a Pugh clause that was added to the lease. At the expiration of the three-year primary term, production in paying quantities was occurring in only three of eight units that included lands covered by the disputed lease. The Plaintiffs argued that the Pugh clause terminated the lease as to the lands within
5
G r o w t h T h r o u g h E d u c a t i o n - O c t o b e r / N o v e m b e r / D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 9
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker