Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update

[StevoJH]

That's why the legal challenge that Malaysia preparing seems against both Kongsberg and Norway Government. In the end it is legally binding contract, and one sided contract termination will mostly going to be pursue with legal dispute. Force Majeure claim is in my opinion debatable to be use on matter of export restriction changes. From what I gather from Malaysian forums, previously the choice going to be all MBDA (Exocet and Mica). Then Kongsberg and supported by Norway lobby manage to get NSM contract over Exocet.

In the end I suspect MBDA Exocet will going to reclaim the contract. Malaysia now seems going to pursue legal means to make Kongsberg and Norway paid the business reputation prices, at least for this part of Asia defense market.

Going to start with the fact that I am *not* a Solicitor/Lawyer/Barrister/Legal Professional.

From the way I see it.

A contract only remains legally binding when the laws of the country governing the contract allow the provisions of the contract to be legal.

If the laws change to make provisions of the contract illegal, the contract would become unenforceable.

So basically if this goes to court in Norway, good luck.

 

[Ananda]

The Norwegian government have been evasive and acted in bad faith. Why? The cancellation notice came via the manufacturer (Kongsberg). The Norwegians (Government) were participating in DSA2026 and had government meetings well before that.

I believe this is the ground that some in Malaysian forum.and online media talk on bringin Norway as secondary plaintif. I have seen some dispute that bring sovereign nation as second plaintiff, especially if it is related to changing political/regulation that create decrimental damage to one sided of legal binding contract.

I also not a lawyer, but I suspect Malaysia want to bring the legal challange to arbitrary court first. International commercial contract agreement usually have put an arbitrary court that all parties agree on before signing the contract. This is international contract and usually binding using the nation law that are being choose as arbitrary court in case legal dispute come out.

International commerce usually not going to follow only one country law, but they will agree upon on choosen court that they can consider neutral on handling international commerce dispute. Usually that court reside on a financial center market. For example in Southeast Asia usually Singapore, or Euro can be either London or Paris. I don't know where this Kongsberg vs Malaysia dispute arbitrary court is, but I'm quite certain it will not be Kuala Lumpur or Oslo.