Earlier this week EnergyReview.Net said a disgruntled Todd Energy was so disappointed with the commission's conditions for joint marketing and selling of gas that was considering a legal appeal.

Yesterday Shell New Zealand, Todd Energy and OMV Petroleum admitted an appeal was possible, either on a joint or individual basis, by the end of the month.

They said the June 2006 project completion deadline imposed by the commission posed a "significant" additional risk for partners still seeking to secure project finance.

Shell NZ chairman Lloyd Taylor has said his company has its financing in place and is ready to make a final investment decision in the first half of 2004. It is believed OMV is similarly placed, while Todd Energy remains tight-lipped but very sensitive to speculation about its financial capacity.

The partners said any failure to achieve the June 2006 deadline would "void" the approval for joint marketing of uncontracted gas after that date, unless an extension is granted.

However, industry commentators believe that's a rather strict interpretation of the commission's ruling.

"That seems a didactic interpretation. In normal circumstances you would hope common sense would prevail between the developers and regulator and that they would work through these issues," one told ERN.

He also said he believed the joint venture may possibly be testing the government's patience, particularly in the context of security of the country's dwindling gas supply.

"The joint venture has a licence but the Crown still owns the hydrocarbon resources and they have an obligation to maximise the amount of hydrocarbons recovered from this strategic field."

A concern has also been aired that the dynamics of the Pohokura project might echo that of the Maari operating agreement, which had then-operator Cultus Petroleum describing the situation as that of the "tail wagging the dog".

The Pohokura partners added that the joint venture would need to ensure the appeal process could be managed expeditiously and in parallel with other scheduled activities, without compromising the June 2006 target date to which they were all committed.

The parties have until 30 September 2003 to determine whether to appeal to the High Court.