Seoul-based Daelim Corporation on 13 February took Bomin Bunker Oil Pte Ltd, the Singapore arm of marine fuels trading and supply firm Bomin Group, to a U.S. Court over a $741,570 bunker claim from the supply of alleged off-spec marine fuel.
Daelim Corporation on 11 September, 2018 contracted Bomin Bunker Oil for the supply of 1,180 metric tonnes (mt) of RMG 380 marine fuel and 15 mt of marine gas oil (MGO) to the Mineral Ningbo, according to legal documents obtained by Manifold Times.
The bunker stems were delivered to the bulk carrier at Caofeidian port in China at between 18 to 19 September, 2018 via physical supplier Chimbusco Marine Bunker (Tianjin) Co. Ltd.
“After the bunker fuel was delivered to the Vessel, it became apparent that it was contaminated and could not be used for its intended purpose. The initial testing of the fuel was performed on October 1, 2018,” it stated.
“The initial results indicated that the fuel contained impurities such as Catfines, and 1,2 Dichloroethane, which required further testing to qualify contaminants and identify any potential problems,” it adds.
“The second test was performed on October 19, 2018 and confirmed that the bunker fuel contains Organic Chloride and 1,2 Dichloroethane belonging to the family of hydrocarbons, which are often used in cleaning solutions, coolants, and pesticides. The presence of these contaminants render the fuel off-specification according to clause 5 of ISO 8217 and MARPOL annex VI section 18.1.”
Daelim Corporation is seeking a total claim of $741,570 broken down into the following:
Photo credit: MarineTraffic / Andy Ru
Published: 20 February, 2019
Maritime Surveillance System of Malaysia re-detected the ship's position 5 minutes after the vessel was caught leaving its position around 9.50 pm on 21 May.
Jim Leighton uses the case of Lukoil Asia v Ocean Tankers, the “Ocean Neptune” case, as an example.
Vessel alleged to have supplied 4,320 mt of diesel to DPRK tankers during September 2017 in East China Sea.
‘We would like to express our deep gratitude to Singapore Police Coast Guard and Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore for their prompt intervention that crippled the unlawful activity,’ states Alex Ow Yong.
Bunker suppliers should consider how to contractually secure maritime liens against bunker tanker and the receiving vessel which the bunkers are ultimately bound.
Singapore-registered vessel believed to have misappropriated fuel without company's knowledge.
‘This biofuel bunker delivery represents a new chapter for Eng Hua as we are now moving with the times towards the era of decarbonisation,’ Mike Sin, Director at Eng Hua, tells bunkering publication Manifold Times.
MPA has also asked Glencore to improve its internal procedures to ensure that prompt action is taken in future when it becomes aware of, or reasonably suspects, any irregularity in fuel quality, it states.
Dynamic Asset Investments Limited and Goldsland Holdings Co Ltd helped Vermont UM Bunkering maintain a “Cash Float” of about SGD 100,000 to facilitate “buyback” bunker transactions at Singapore port.
Senior Cargo Officer gained SGD 48,800 worth of commission from “buyback” bunker transactions and illegally obtained SGD 410,712.257 by cheating Vermont, a Singapore court heard on Thursday (21 July).
Firm hopes to leverage partnership in Greece as a springboard to expand into neighbouring and overseas markets including Europe and China, says Robin Van Elderen, Regional Head Bunkers, Europe, Sing Fuels.
Singapore can help less developed countries in SouthEast Asia through ‘piloting and scaling fuels and technology as well as a leading hub for green finance’, said DNV Group President and CEO Remi Eriksen.
