Hunt v. BP Exploration Company (Libya) LTD. (“Hunt I”)

492 F. Supp. 885 (1980)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Hunt v. BP Exploration Company (Libya) LTD. (“Hunt I”)

United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
492 F. Supp. 885 (1980)

Facts

Nelson Bunker Hunt (plaintiff) was an American citizen who entered into a joint venture with BP Exploration Company (Libya) LTD (BP) (defendant), an English company, to explore and develop an oil field in a concession granted to Hunt by the Libyan government. Hunt agreed to give BP a one-half interest in the concession plus a payment based on the production of oil, and in exchange, BP agreed to pay for certain initial exploration and development costs. Several years later, the Libyan government nationalized the concession, and BP and Hunt lost their interests in the concession. BP sued Hunt in England, claiming that the contract was frustrated when the Libyan government took its interest in the concession, and that Hunt had benefited from BP’s performance of its obligations under the contract before the concession was taken. After BP was unsuccessful in serving Hunt personally, the English court granted BP’s request to serve Hunt by mail. Hunt sought a dismissal of the English action for lack of personal jurisdiction. The English court denied Hunt’s request for dismissal. The English case proceeded to trial, which resulted in a judgment against Hunt, and Hunt appealed. While the English proceedings were still pending, Hunt filed suit in United States federal district court, seeking a declaratory judgment that he owed nothing to BP. BP moved for summary judgment based on the English judgment, but Hunt argued that the English judgment should not be recognized in the United States because, among other things, service of the complaint did not comport with United States due-process requirements, the judgment violated several public policies of the United States, and England did not reciprocate recognition of American judgments.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Higginbotham, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership