Connect with us

Legal

“Bow Jubail” bunker spill: Owner could have controlled liability

It is the onus on a party seeking to limit liability to provide all information at early stage, says lawyer.

Admin

Published

on

5c109c65a357f 1544592485

The following article is written by Vivian van der Kuil, Partner at Rotterdam-based legal firm AKD NV, and shared with Singapore bunker publication Manifold Times; it was first published in the newsletter of the International Law Office.

Onus on party seeking to limit liability to provide all information at early stage

A case recently brought before the Rotterdam Court emphasises the importance of assessing at an early stage which liability regime applies when a party seeks to limit its exposure to claims in the event of an oil spill at sea.

Liability regimes

The limits of liability, as well as the claims to which limitation may apply, can vary greatly. The Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976 (LLMC) and the 1996 Protocol provide the general legal framework for limitation of liability. They allow a shipowner and certain other parties closely connected to the operation of the vessel to limit liability for a wide variety of claims, most importantly for claims in respect of loss of life, personal injury or loss of or damage to property occurring on board or in direct connection with the operation of the ship or with salvage operations, and consequential loss resulting therefrom.

In order to be able to rely on limitation of liability, a shipowner must file a request and then constitute a so-called 'limitation fund' – by putting up a guarantee or cash payment (depending on the jurisdiction where the fund is established) for the amount of the limited liability – which is calculated on the basis of the gross tonnage of the vessel.

The LLMC stipulates that the rules of the convention do not apply to claims for oil pollution damage within the meaning of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1969 (CLC) or of any amendment or protocol thereto. The CLC and subsequent 1976 and 1992 Protocols introduced the system of strict liability for owners of seagoing vessels constructed or adapted for the carriage of oil in bulk as cargo, but only when the vessel is actually carrying oil in bulk as cargo or following such carriage unless it has proved that it has no residues of such carriage of oil in bulk on board.

The International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (Bunker Convention) 2001, meanwhile, is modelled on the CLC and deals with damage caused by spills of oil when carried as ships' bunkers. Both conventions determine that the registered owner of a vessel is to maintain compulsory insurance cover and have the possibility of direct action which allows a claim for compensation for pollution damage to be brought directly against an insurer.

Rotterdam Court decision

A recent decision by the Rotterdam Court regarding a major oil spill in the port of Rotterdam caused by the vessel Bow Jubail in June 2018 underlines the need to assess the nature of the limitation regime which applies. (1)

The owner of the Bow Jubail, a seagoing vessel designed to carry oil and other cargoes in bulk, filed a request to limit liability based on the LLMC and the Bunker Convention. The Rotterdam Court asked the owner to clarify why the CLC was not applicable, even though the vessel qualified as a ship as described under the CLC (ie, designed to carry oil in bulk as cargo).

According to the owner, the Bow Jubail was at the time of the incident not carrying oil and had no residues of oil in bulk on board. However, the Rotterdam Court decided that, based on the information available, it could not be established that the Bow Jubail had no residues of oil in bulk on board, especially since the vessel's previous cargo had consisted of various persistent oils. In addition, the court emphasised that, in procedures concerning limitation of liability, it is the responsibility of the party seeking to rely on limitation to provide all of the information available at an early stage.

Comment

The request filed by the owner of the Bow Jubail was denied, resulting in unlimited liability at least until a new request based on the CLC was filed and decided upon. This could all have been avoided if an assessment had been made of the various limitation regimes and the differences between them.

For further information on this topic please contact Vivian van der Kuil at AKD NV by telephone (+31 88 253 5000) or email ([email protected]). The AKD website can be accessed at www.akd.nl.

Endnotes
(1) 9 November 2018, ECLI: RBROT:2018:9174.

Related: Odfjell faces EUR 80 million bill over Bow Jubail bunker spill
RelatedRotterdam Port Authority sues NCC over bunker spill
RelatedUPDATE 3: Rotterdam bunker spill incident
RelatedUPDATE 2: Rotterdam bunker spill incident
RelatedUPDATE: Rotterdam bunker spill
RelatedOdfjell apologies for Rotterdam bunker spill incident
RelatedBunker spill at Rotterdam, shipowner held responsible

Photo credit: Port of Rotterdam Authority
Published: 12 December, 2018
 

Continue Reading

Winding up

Singapore: High Court to hear oil trader Hontop Energy winding up application

Application for the winding up of Hontop Energy (Singapore) Pte Ltd was filed by joint and several judicial managers of the company on 30 October, according to Government Gazette notice.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED singapore high court

An application for the winding up of Hontop Energy (Singapore) Pte Ltd was filed by joint and several judicial managers of the company on 30 October, according to Friday (29 November) notice on the Government Gazette.

It noted the winding up application is directed to be heard before the Judge sitting in the General Division of the High Court at 10am on 21 January. 

Hontop Energy was one of four Singapore-based trading companies to have collapsed in 2020, together with oil traders Hin Leong and Zenrock and coal trading firm Agritrade. Hontop, which went into receivership in February, is fully owned by Chinese private-sector firm Wanda whose group assets include the 100,000 b/d Tianhong independent refinery in Shandong province.

It was previously reported that the High Court of Singapore approved Malaysian bank CIMB’s application for Hontop Energy, the trading arm of Chinese independent refiner China Wanda Holding Group Co Ltd, to be placed under judicial management. 

According to the filing at the time, CIMB is looking to recover USD 105 million that it has lent to the company and Hontop owes approximately USD 470 million to seven creditors. 

Lin Yueh Hung and Oon Su Sun of RSM Corporate Advisory Pte Ltd were nominated to act as the judicial managers.

According to the Government Gazette notice, any creditor or contributory of the company desiring to support or oppose the making of an order on the winding up application may appear at the time of hearing by himself or his counsel for that purpose.

A copy of the winding up application will be furnished to any creditor or contributory of the company requiring the copy of the winding up application by the undersigned on payment of the regulated charge for the same.

The Applicant's address is 8 Wilkie Road #03-08 Wilkie Edge, Singapore 228095.

The Applicant's solicitors are Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP of 9 Straits View #06-07 Marina One West Tower, Singapore 018937.

Note: Any person who intends to appear on the hearing of the winding up application must serve on or send by post to the abovenamed RAJAH & TANN SINGAPORE LLP, the Claimant’s Solicitors, notice in writing of his intention to do so. The notice must state the name and address of the person, or, if a firm, the name and address of the firm, and must be signed by the person, firm, or his or their solicitor (if any). Unless otherwise directed by the Court, the notice must be served and, if sent by post, must be posted in such sufficient time as in the ordinary course of post to reach the abovenamed at least 3 clear working days before 20 January 2025 (the day before the day appointed for the hearing of the application).

Related: Hontop Energy placed under judicial management over fraudulent conduct accusations
Related: Hearing date set for Hontop Energy to be placed under judicial management
Related: CIMB requests for Hontop Energy restructuring amid suspicious transactions with BP
Related: Argus Media: Hontop Energy fraud allegations add to Singapore trading woes
Related: BP Singapore oil traders on leave over being named in Hontop Energy fraud allegations

 

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 2 December, 2024

Continue Reading

Business

Shell MGO bunker heist: Bunker clerk pleads guilty to helping Sentek acquire misappropriated fuel

Wong Wai Meng, who received more than USD 286,000 from Sentek Marine & Trading for his assistance, pleaded guilty to 12 counts of intentionally helping the firm acquire the misappropriated marine gas.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Ekaterina Bolovtsova on PEXELS

A bunker clerk, Wong Wai Meng, who received more than USD 286,000 (SGD 384,681) from Singapore-based Sentek Marine & Trading (Sentek) for his assistance, pleaded guilty to 12 counts of intentionally helping the company acquire misappropriated marine gas oil, The Straits Times reported on Friday (29 November).

The 58-year-old Singaporean was employed at the Sentek when he assisted in acquiring more than 28,000 metric tonnes (mt) of the misappropriated fuel worth USD 13.58 million (SGD 18.26 million). 

Wong committed the offences over 46 occasions between August 2014 and December 2017.

Wong is among the three bunker clerks previously employed by Sentek, who were charged for offences under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (CDSA) and the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

Another bunker clerk among the three charged, Wong Kuin Wah, 61, was sentenced to seven years and six months’ jail on 18 November for his role in misappropriating more than 27,000 tonnes of gas oil worth around USD 12.8 million (SGD 17.2 million).

The third individual who was charged, Boo Pu Wen, reportedly passed away in July 2023 and had his charges abated following his death, meaning Boo’s court proceedings over his 19 charges at the time came to an end. 

Former Shell employees, who were key members of a group who dishonestly misappropriated fuel from Shell Pulau Bukom, were sentenced to jail in court earlier.

Earlier coverage of developments by Manifold Times regarding the Shell MGO bunker heist can be found below:

Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Shell employees sentenced to more than 23 years in prison each
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Shell employees plead guilty to multiple offences
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Shell employee receives over 16-year jail sentence
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Intertek Surveyor sentenced to four months’ jail for corruption
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Intertek Surveyor pleads guilty to corruption charge
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Shell Process Technician receives 195-month jail sentence
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Police seize property, cars, watches from ex-Shell Bukom Process Technician
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Shell blending specialist jailed over USD 956,000 worth of misappropriated gasoil
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Former Intertek, Inspectorate surveyors receive fines, jail sentences
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-CCIC Singapore surveyor pleads guilty to misconduct, receiving USD 12k in bribes
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Process Technician receives 184-month prison sentence over illicit involvement
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Syndicate member’s nephew jailed over concealment of safe containing valuables
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: 12 former surveyors from Intertek, Inspectorate, CCIC, SGS charged for corruption
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Former Shore Loading Officer receives 29-year jail sentence over total 85 charges
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Process Technician received minimum SGD 735,000 in benefits, faces 43 charges
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Ex-Shell employee admits leading role in illicit operation
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Sentek ex-Director faces 40 fresh charges
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Two former Shell employees jailed over theft
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: High Court affirms ‘Prime South’ forfeiture to Singapore State
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Three ex-Shell employees charged with bribing surveyors
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Second ex-Shell employee pleads guilty to nine charges
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: First ex-Shell employee to plead guilty over involvement
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Director of Singapore bunkering firm released from police custody
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Oil tanker ‘Prime South’ forfeited by State Courts of Singapore
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist: Director of Singapore bunkering firm face charge at State Courts
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Third offender pleads guilty for gas oil theft
Related: Captain of “Prime South” jailed in Shell Pulau Bukom gas oil theft
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Ex-Chief Officer of Prime South jailed
Related: Singapore: Shell MGO bunker heist amount balloons to USD$142 million
Related: Shell MGO bunker heist update: Fresh charges issued at Singapore court
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: More charges issued at court
Related: Shell Singapore oil heist: Breakdown of stolen oil cargoes
Related: Intertek Singapore employee among Shell oil heist suspects

 

Photo credit: Katrin Bolovtsova
Published: 2 December, 2024

Continue Reading

Winding up

High Court of Singapore issues winding up order against ANR Shipping

Yew Choon Pte Ltd filed a winding up application against ANR Shipping (S) on 30 October; creditors of ANR Shipping (S) should file their proof of debt with the liquidators.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Sora Shimazaki on Pexels

The High Court of Singapore on Friday (22 November) issued a winding up order to ANR Shipping (S) Pte Ltd, according to a 27 November notice on the Government Gazette.

The winding up application was filed by Yew Choon Pte Ltd on 30 October.

According to ANR Shipping website, ANR Shipping (S) Pte Ltd is under the ANR Group of Companies. The services offered by the Group include vessel chartering and tug and barge services. 

The winding up order also included the following names and address of the joint and several liquidators:

DON HO MUN-TUKE
HO CHJUEN MENG, DAVID DONALD
BOTH CARE OF DHA+ PAC
63 Market Street
#05-01A
Bank of Singapore Centre
Singapore 048942

All creditors of ANR Shipping (S) should file their proof of debt with the liquidators who will be administering all affairs of the company.

Related: Singapore: High Court to hear ANR Shipping winding up application on 22 November

 

Photo credit: Sora Shimazaki
Published: 28 November, 2024

Continue Reading
Advertisement
  • Consort advertisement v2
  • RE 05 Lighthouse GIF
  • EMF banner 400x330 slogan
  • SBF2
  • v4Helmsman Gif Banner 01
  • Aderco advert 400x330 1

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

  • SEAOIL 3+5 GIF
  • 102Meth Logo GIF copy
  • Singfar advertisement final
  • Triton Bunkering advertisement v2
  • HL 2022 adv v1


  • E Marine logo
  • Uni Fuels oct 2024 ad
  • Auramarine 01
  • Mokara Final
  • Synergy Asia Bunkering logo MT
  • Trillion Energy
  • 300 300
  • Cathay Marine Fuel Oil Trading logo
  • PSP Marine logo
  • Energe Logo
  • VPS 2021 advertisement
  • Advert Shipping Manifold resized1
  • Headway Manifold
  • 400x330 v2 copy

Trending