V Bala, a partner in Rajah & Tann Singapore’s Shipping & International Trade practice group, has highlighted the critical importance of preserving evidence in the first 48 hours of a bunker incident, outlining best practices for ship managers to protect potential claims and defences:

A vessel somewhere in the Indian Ocean reports abnormal fuel behaviour. Sludge is forming. Filters are clogging. Consumption looks wrong. Within hours, owners, charterers, managers, suppliers and insurers are exchanging messages. Everyone asks the same question: is there a claim? It is reasonable. It is also often premature. The better question is: what evidence will still exist in 48 hours to explain what happened?

For all the technical sophistication around modern bunker disputes, many are decided less by expert reports than by the first two days after trouble appears. The tribunal may sit years later. The factual foundation is usually laid before the vessel reaches its next port.

Bunker claims are commonly treated as technical contests about fuel specifications, ISO standards and competing laboratory results. They are that. But experienced litigators quickly notice a simpler pattern: the strongest cases are rarely built by the cleverest lawyers. They are built by the best recordkeepers.

The Vanishing Evidence Problem 

Unlike a collision, fire or grounding, bad bunkers leave few obvious visual traces. The evidence is scattered across tanks, samples, engine records, maintenance logs, performance data and electronic communications. Much of it can deteriorate, disappear or become contaminated with surprising speed.

A discarded sample cannot be recreated. A cleaned filter may tell a different story from one preserved immediately after failure. Electronic records overwritten in routine operations may never be recovered usefully. Crew change. Memories fade. The difficulty is that bunker incidents rarely feel like casualties when they first arise. They look like operational nuisances.

The Pressure to Move On 

A ship manager’s first duty is to keep the vessel trading. Engineers solve the immediate problem. Technical managers assess options. Owners watch delay. Charterers want assurance. The commercial pressure to restore normality is intense. It is also the moment when evidential mistakes are most easily made.

Fuel is blended before investigations are complete. Samples are mishandled. Machinery is repaired before it is properly photographed. Internal messages fill with theories. By the time experts arrive, the most useful evidence may already have changed.

The Danger of Instant Certainty 

Modern communication has made this harder. A concern raised in the engine room can reach executives across continents within minutes. The advantages are obvious. So are the risks.

The earliest explanations are often the least reliable. When machinery problems arise shortly after bunkering, the fuel is naturally blamed because it is the most visible recent change. Sometimes that is right. Sometimes it is not.

Yet once a theory enters circulation, it acquires momentum. Months later, early WhatsApp messages or emails written under pressure may be attached to witness statements, analysed by experts and scrutinised by lawyers. A passing operational remark can begin to look like a settled conclusion.

The Documentary Ship 

Shipping remains a documentary business. Despite digitalisation, disputes still turn on engine logs, maintenance reports, fuel transfer records, sounding measurements and superintendent correspondence.

What matters is not merely whether those records exist, but what story they tell together. Tribunals value contemporaneous documents because they were created before positions hardened. They are the closest thing to a real-time account.

Ship Managers at the Centre 

Ship managers sit at the centre of the network: owners, financiers, charterers, bunker suppliers, insurers and regulators. In bunker matters, their role now goes beyond technical operation. It includes preserving enough information to understand what happened if the matter becomes a claim.

What the Best Operators Do Differently 

If bunker disputes are won in the first 48 hours, what do the best operators do differently? They treat fuel incidents as evidential events as well as operational ones. While engineers restore function, someone asks: if this becomes a dispute, what will we wish we had preserved today?

They resist instant certainty. Communications distinguish facts from theories. There is a difference between recording that power loss followed consumption from a particular tank and declaring that the supplier delivered bad fuel.

They know samples are useful only if identity, seals, labels and custody can be proved. They keep samples alongside the full operational record: delivery documents, tank soundings, transfer history, engine logs, alarms, purifier settings, maintenance data and ship-to-shore messages.

They preserve physical evidence before routine work alters it. Filters, residues and affected components may contain information that disappears once cleaned or discarded. Photographs should capture the condition found, not just the condition after repair.

Finally, they bring the right expertise to the problem early. They also involve the right people early: surveyors, laboratories, technical experts, insurers and lawyers. A surveyor or technical expert can help identify what should be sampled, photographed, retained and recorded before the evidence changes. Lawyers and insurers can help ensure that notifications are made, communications remain measured and contractual deadlines are not overlooked. The point is not to turn every operational problem into litigation. It is to avoid discovering, months later, that the ingredients of a sound claim or defence were lost during the first voyage after the incident.

The first 48-hour discipline 

The lesson is simple. In bunker disputes, the law often comes late. The evidence comes early. The party that preserves it calmly, completely and without premature blame gives itself the best chance of winning the argument when the dispute finally arrives.

Photo credit: Rajah & Tann Singapore
Published: 2 September, 2026

Singapore-based multi-disciplinary law firm Helmsman LLC on Tuesday (1 September) said it has appointed Raj Mannar as Director and Head of its Corporate, Mergers & Acquisitions practice. 

Raj brings close to fifteen years of experience advising on corporate and commercial matters, mergers and acquisitions, corporate governance, investments, fundraising and employment.

Raj’s arrival strengthens the firm’s Corporate, M&A capabilities across Southeast Asia and beyond. He regularly advises on cross-border acquisitions and divestments, joint ventures and corporate restructurings, and equity and debt fundraisings. His deal experience has seen him act on both domestic and cross border transactions valued, in aggregate, in excess of USD 500 million.

His wider practice also covers corporate governance and general commercial matters, most recently acting as Singapore counsel on Victory Giant Technology’s USD 2.6 billion listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

Raj has been recognised as one of Southeast Asia’s Top 40 Under 40 lawyers by LexisNexis and as a Rising Star by AsiaLaw.

Ian Teo, Managing Director of Helmsman, said: “We are delighted to welcome Raj to Helmsman. His deep transactional experience across complex, cross-border matters and his track record advising clients through every stage of a deal make him an outstanding addition to our team. We look forward to the continued growth of our Corporate, Mergers & Acquisitions practice under his leadership.”

Raj Mannar said: “Helmsman has built its reputation on commercial, client-focused advice, and I am delighted to join at this stage of the firm’s growth. I look forward to working with the team to build out the Corporate, Mergers & Acquisitions practice in Singapore and across the region.”’

Photo credit: Helmsman
Published: 1 September, 2026

Clean energy equipment and services provider CIMC Enric on Monday (31 August) said LNG-powered container vessel Digul Mas, owned by Indonesian listed shipping company TEMAS Group, has successfully completed its commercial maiden voyage.

The vessel has commenced operations on the inter-island route connecting Surabaya, Kendari, and Gorontalo, Indonesia.

The vessel adopts an innovative LNG fuel tank swapping model, enabling flexible and efficient LNG refuelling without relying on large-scale bunkering infrastructure.

As a key solution provider for the project, CIMC Enric supplied specialised marine LNG fuel tanks and delivered TEMAS Group’s 5 MMSCFD skid-mounted LNG liquefaction plant.

“Together, these solutions create an integrated LNG value chain covering liquefaction, storage and transportation, and marine fuel utilisation,” the company said. 

“For Indonesia’s archipelagic shipping market, where natural gas pipeline infrastructure is limited and the construction of large-scale LNG bunkering terminals can be challenging, this model offers a flexible alternative.” 

By combining skid-mounted LNG liquefaction plants with standardised LNG fuel tanks, CIMC Enric’s virtual pipeline solution enables LNG to be produced, transported, stored, and supplied to vessels independently and flexibly—reducing the need for extensive modifications to existing bunkering infrastructure.

“The successful operation of Digul Mas marked an important milestone in the application of CIMC Enric’s virtual pipeline solution in overseas marine transportation, while demonstrating a practical and replicable pathway for the low-carbon transformation of maritime shipping in Indonesia and Southeast Asia,” the company added. 

Photo credit: CIMC Enric
Published: 1 September, 2026