Clive Palmer loses ‘cynical’ bid to dodge $16m gas bill

The Queensland Supreme Court has ruled against attempts by Clive Palmer to avoid paying a bill worth more than $16m.

Embattled businessman Clive Palmer lost his case in the Queensland Supreme Court yesterday. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen

The Queensland Supreme Court has ruled against attempts by Clive Palmer to avoid paying a bill worth more than $16 million.

Justice David Boddice yesterday dismissed “cynical’’ court ­action in which Palmer Petroleum demanded a $US16.7m payment from Singapore-based exploration company BGP Geoexplorer.

BGP Geoexplorer conducted 3D marine seismic surveying of Palmer Petroleum’s Papua New Guinea, producing a report in 2012. A year later, Mr Palmer claimed 3D seismic surveying of his leases, west of Port Moresby, had identified a “potential $35 billion gas region off the north coast of PNG to rival Australia’s North West Shelf”.

Mr Palmer claimed that $50m was spent on exploration over 3000sq km, with up to 28 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas.

Justice Boddice described the court action by Palmer Petroleum as a “cynical attempt to deflect ­responsibility”.

“The respondent (BGP) undertook the work required of it and forwarded invoices in relation thereto,” Justice Boddice said.

“Far from disputing an obligation to pay those amounts, the applicant (Palmer Petroleum) ­entered into replacement deeds and repayment plans.

“When those arrangements were not met by the applicant, the applicant apologised for non-­payment and candidly acknowledged that non-payment was due to cashflow problems.”

Justice Boddice said a “belated attempt to avoid payment by claims of failure by the respondent to perform its obligations” was an attempt to deflect for a debt owing.

Claims made by Mr Palmer that he was disappointed with the work by BGP did not have ­“sufficient objective existence”.

“It amounts to a “merely spurious claim, bluster or assertion” lacking sufficient actual particularity “to exclude the fanciful or ­futile”.

Mr Palmer, the director of Palmer Petroleum, had also refused to travel to Beijing to settle the outstanding debt, claiming his human rights would not be protected.

He claimed he was suspicious that BGP had wanted to gain ­access to the petroleum licence areas to acquire information ­regarding the extent of resources for the benefit of “their corporate group and the government of China”.

Justice Boddice said “a consideration of the claimed damages said to have been suffered by the applicant also reveals the hollowness of the applicant’s assertions”.

He also said “contemp­oraneous correspondence” supported his view Palmer Petroleum had tried to deflect responsibility.

“Whilst the applicant contends there is a genuine dispute about the existence or amount of the debt the subject of the statutory demand, a consideration of the material does not support that contention,” Justice Boddice said.

Palmer Petroleum is expected to become the latest company in Mr Palmer’s business empire to be listed as insolvent. Queensland Nickel is under administration and Palmer Aviation has been placed into liquidation.

The future of Mr Palmer’s north Queensland nickel refinery is expected to be made clear at a creditors meeting in Townsville on Monday.

Administrator FTI Consulting has requested a $10m lifeline from the state government to keep the refinery open until cash flow improves, but an official response has not been received.

Mr Palmer did not comment on yesterday’s court ruling against his company.