It's a familiar scenario: you contract to provide advice,
and you think there has been mission creep. Can you claim a
reasonable fee for what you see as the extra you have provided
based on the other side being unjustly enriched? Not in this
case.
Services within scope of contract
RMK Maritime claimed it was engaged under an advisory agreement
to provide limited services to Euronav in relation to a merger with
Gener8. RMK said it ultimately provided a broader range of advisory
services allegedly based on a shared understanding that Euronav
would pay a further reasonable fee. Euronav argued this was all
within scope, there was no shared understanding, and that any
further fee was understood to be discretionary.
