The German energy company is pursuing compensation for losses tied to gas volumes that Gazprom Export has not supplied since June 2022.
Uniper has initiated arbitration against Gazprom Export in an international forum, seeking repayment for the financial losses incurred as a result of undelivered gas volumes since June. The case is being heard in Stockholm, with Uniper arguing that Gazprom Export’s actions forced it to secure replacement supplies at higher market prices to meet pre-agreed commitments to customers.
Uniper estimates that its costs will reach at least 11.6 billion euros and may rise further by the end of 2024. The company emphasizes that the damages arise from gas volumes covered by a contract with Gazprom that were not delivered, necessitating the purchase of replacement gas at substantially elevated prices. The ongoing costs, according to Uniper, are not its responsibility and represent a significant financial burden caused by Gazprom Export’s breach.
Gazprom Export acknowledged that Uniper has started arbitration but stated that it will assess the claim and defend its interests within the legal framework. Gazprom Export rejects the assertion that a breach of contract occurred and questions the legitimacy of Uniper’s claims.
Gazprom’s force majeure
On July 18, Gazprom declared force majeure regarding gas supplies to Europe. Reuters reported that the declaration was based on a letter sent to one of Gazprom’s customers, describing extraordinary circumstances beyond Gazprom’s control that prevent delivery. The force majeure clause reportedly applies to deliveries beginning 14 June, with the report noting shipments to Germany via the Nord Stream pipeline as part of the affected routes.
Earlier, on June 14, Nord Stream capacity to Germany was reduced by 40 percent, followed by a further one third reduction the next day. Gazprom attributed the reductions to a delay in the repair of Siemens turbines, which it linked to sanctions and logistics related to the turbine units. Siemens later stated that the turbines were manufactured at a Canadian facility and could not be returned from repair due to Canadian sanctions on Russia. Deliveries via Nord Stream eventually ceased on August 31. After an explosion on September 26 whose cause remains officially undetermined, the operation by SP ended entirely, and investigations continue.
Uniper did not view force majeure as a sufficient reason to halt gas pumping. On July 22, the head of the German energy concern cautioned that the situation could lead to legal action. The company’s feedback suggested that a reassessment of its relationship with Gazprom was surprised by the scale of losses and the declaration of force majeure, potentially signaling forthcoming litigation.
On July 8, Uniper sought state support from the German government in response to reduced Gazprom supplies. By July 18, the firm announced it was drawing gas from its storage facilities to preserve liquidity and warned customers of possible price increases. It also asked the state-owned bank KfW to raise its credit limit, noting that the existing 2 billion euro cap had been reached. By late September, German authorities had provided substantial aid, including 29 billion euros in budget support. It was later reported that the government would nationalize the energy company, invest additional funds to stabilize it, and acquire a controlling stake in Finnish Fortum to hold a 99 percent share and assert broader control over Uniper’s operations.
For readers in North America, the unfolding events illustrate how cross-border energy supply contracts and geopolitical tensions intersect with market dynamics, supplier obligations, and the role of government interventions in stabilizing essential energy markets. The arbitration process, the force majeure designation, and the responses from both Uniper and Gazprom Export underscore the risks and resilience required in energy provisioning across European networks and beyond. This case continues to influence how utilities approach long-term gas supply arrangements and the management of associated financial exposure in a highly regulated, global environment. The evolving situation remains subject to legal proceedings and policy developments in Europe and allied markets, with potential implications for energy pricing, supplier relationships, and strategic state support in the energy sector. © Attribution: Reuters and related reporting.