Connect with us

Legal

Helmsman on Inter-Pacific Petroleum legal battle: When ignorance meets fraud

Lester Ho, Associate Director of law firm Helmsman shared his timely key takeaways on the recent case of Goh Jin Hian against defunct Singapore bunker supplier Inter-Pacific Petroleum.

Admin

Published

on

Lester Ho Helmsman

Lester Ho, Associate Director of multi-disciplinary law firm Helmsman LLC shared his timely key takeaways on the recent case of Goh Jin Hian v Inter-Pacific Petroleum when the Appellate Division of the High Court in Singapore overturned the High Court’s finding that Mr Goh’s breach had caused IPP to incur the losses:

The collapse of a company often prompts a search for blame, especially where the downfall stems from deliberate misconduct such as fraud that appears avoidable in hindsight. Unsurprisingly, a company’s directors are frequently perceived as the root of the problem and become prime suspects in the inevitable witch hunt for accountability. The recent case of Goh Jin Hian v Inter-Pacific Petroleum Pte Ltd (in liquidation) [2025] SGHC(A) 7 is a timely reminder of a director’s duties as well as the legal risks in the event of breach.

The downfall of Inter-Pacific Petroleum Pte Ltd (“IPP”) is well-documented. The Maritime Port Authority of Singapore suspended IPP’s bunker craft operator licence after discovering that the mass flow meter of a bunker tanker chartered by IPP had been tampered with. Concerns raised by IPP’s banks in relation to its business led its non-executive director, Mr Goh Jin Hian, to discover that it was heavily indebted to the banks. It was also discovered that the facilities had been used on sham sale and purchase transactions.

IPP was subsequently placed in compulsory liquidation, and Mr Goh was sued for breach of his director’s duties. It was alleged that the sham transactions could have been prevented had Mr Goh discharged his duties and that he was therefore responsible for IPP’s losses. At first instance, the High Court found that Mr Goh had breached his duty of care and ordered him to compensate IPP for approximately US$146 million in losses (Inter-Pacific Petroleum Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Goh Jin Hian [2024] SGHC 178). Among other things, the High Court found that Mr Goh was in breach because he was entirely ignorant of IPP’s cargo trading business.

The Appellate Division of the High Court upheld the finding that Mr Goh had breached his duty for having been unaware of IPP’s cargo trading business. However, it overturned the High Court’s finding that Mr Goh’s breach had caused IPP to incur the losses. The Appellate Division found that IPP failed to prove that Mr Goh would have uncovered the sham transactions even if he had discharged his duty. Accordingly, Mr Goh was absolved of his liability to compensate IPP.

There are two broad takeaways from the decision.

The first takeaway is that every director, both executive and non-executive, is held to a minimum standard of care. This standard requires directors to take reasonable steps to put themselves in a position where they can guide and monitor the management of the company. Put simply, ignorance of a company’s business is no defence, even for non-executive directors that are not involved in everyday operations. Accordingly, although Mr Goh was a non-executive director, the fact that he was unaware that IPP was carrying on the business of cargo trading meant that he was in breach of his duties.

It may be surprising that a director could be entirely unaware of an important part of a company’s business. But the reality is that modern day companies have become commercial behemoths with complex and layered operations that makes it all too easy for directors (especially non-executive directors) to delegate oversight over critical business decisions and lose visibility of what their companies do. It is therefore important for directors, regardless of their formal titles, to ensure that there is a robust chain of reporting and command such that they have sufficient knowledge of the company’s operations to discharge their duties.

The second is that, while the law imposes high standards on directors, it does not demand unrealistic standards. As noted, the Appellate Division accepted that Mr Goh had breached his duties for having been unaware of IPP’s cargo trading business. However, it was not persuaded that, even if Mr Goh had discharged his duties and had been properly informed of IPP’s activities, the sham transactions could have been prevented. IPP was affected by what the Appellate Division considered a “deep-seated fraud” that had gone undetected even by IPP’s auditors. In the circumstances, it was far from clear that Mr Goh could have prevented the loss even if he had discharged his duty.

However, just because the law does not expect directors to be superhuman does mean that directors can afford to be complacent. Directors would still do well to take reasonable and diligent steps to ensure that they have a good grasp of the company’s operations and engage competent professionals (e.g., auditors) to help surface risks that they may otherwise miss. In a sense, Mr Goh avoided liability not because his breach was minor, but because the extent of the fraud perpetrated meant that the gravity of his breach cannot be said to have caused the loss. In other words, a less sophisticated or extensive fraud might have yielded a drastically different outcome – directors should take heed.

A timeline organised list of events preceding the current development of Inter-Pacific Petroleum has been recorded by Manifold Times below:

Related: Singapore: Ex-Director of Inter-Pacific Petroleum wins appeal against former company
Related: Singapore: Ex-Director of Inter-Pacific Petroleum appeals High Court decision
Related: Singapore: Former auditors of Inter-Pacific Petroleum undergo private oral examination at court
Related: Singapore: Civil trial between Inter-Pacific Petroleum and Dr Goh Jin Hian begins
Related: Former Singapore Director of Inter-Pacific Petroleum sued for USD 156 million
Related: Inter-Pacific Petroleum creditors authorised to fund lawsuit against former Director
Related: New Silkroutes under investigation over possible breach of Securities and Futures Act
Related: Judicial Managers considering to take former Singapore Director of Inter-Pacific Petroleum to court
Related: Singapore: Inter-Pacific Group receives winding up order from High Court
Related: Singapore: Inter-Pacific Group files for winding up application at High Court
Related: MPA revokes Inter-Pacific Petroleum Pte Ltd bunker supplier licence
Related: Co-heads of Trade and Commodities Finance for Asia-Pacific leave SocGen
Related: Inter-Pacific Group, Inter-Pacific Petroleum to hold creditors’ meet
Related: NewOcean detains Singapore-flagged bunker tanker “Pacific Energy 28”
Related: SocGen lawsuit against NewOcean Petroleum dropped, party to counterclaim
Related: MPA revokes Inter-Pacific Petroleum bunker craft operator licence
Related: Magnets on MFMs: Trial starts for former bunker clerk of “Consort Justice
Related: First suspect charged over MFM tampering in landmark case
Related: With nearly $180 million of debt, IPP proposes interim judicial management
Related: Inter-Pacific Group, Inter-Pacific Petroleum under judicial management
Related: Magnets on MFMs: “Consort Justice” crew pleads ‘not guilty’ to tampering charge
Related: IPP responds to temporary suspension of bunker craft operator licence
Related: MPA temporarily suspends IPP bunker craft operator licence
Related: Singapore: Bunker Cargo officer, crew face charges over alleged MFM tampering

 

Photo credit: Helmsman
Published: 13 June, 2025

Continue Reading

Legal

Singapore withdraws remaining 127 charges against Hin Leong founder OK Lim

Lim Oon Kuin, also known as OK Lim, was issued a stern warning and a district court granted him a discharge amounting to an acquittal for these charges on 17 July.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Sora Shimazaki on Pexels

Founder of collapsed oil trader Hin Leong Trading, Lim Oon Kuin, also known as OK Lim, has had the remaining 127 charges against him withdrawn, according to The Straits Times on Monday (20 July). 

OK Lim was issued a stern warning and a district court granted him a discharge amounting to an acquittal for these charges, including those for cheating, on 17 July. The discharge means Lim cannot be prosecuted again for the same offences.

Lim, 84, is currently serving a 13½-year prison sentence after the High Court reduced his original 17½-year jail term in March 2026. He was convicted in 2024 on two cheating charges and one count of abetting forgery in a case prosecutors described as one of Singapore’s most serious trade finance frauds.

Lim was convicted in May 2024 of two charges of cheating the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) and one count of abetting forgery that proceeded to trial out of a total of 130 criminal charges.

He was first charged in court on 14 August 2020, and was subsequently handed further charges in court on 25 September 2020, 30 April 2021 and 24 June 2021 for his role in perpetuating fraud on various financial institutions. 

A total of 130 charges were eventually brought against him for cheating and forgery-related offences.

Related: Singapore: Hin Leong Founder OK Lim gets jail term slashed to 13.5 years

 

Photo credit: Sora Shimazaki
Published: 21 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Winding up

Singapore: Coastal Logistics Pte Ltd to be wound up voluntarily

Coastal Logistics was reportedly affiliated with troubled Singapore bunker player Coastal Oil (Singapore) Pte Ltd.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Drew Beamer

Several resolutions for Coastal Logistics Pte Ltd were made during an extraordinary general meeting held on 14 July, according to a notice in the Government Gazette on Friday (4 July).

The following resolutions were duly passed during the meeting:

As Special Resolution

  • That it has been proved to the satisfaction of the meeting that the Company cannot by reason of its liabilities continue its business and accordingly the Company be wound up voluntarily pursuant to Section 160(1)(b) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (No. 40 of 2018);

As Ordinary Resolutions

  • that Mr. Wong Pheng Cheong Martin and Ms. Koay May Yee, both care of FTI Consulting (Singapore) Pte Ltd, One Raffles Quay, #27-10 South Tower, Singapore 048583 be appointed as the joint and several Liquidators of the Company for the purpose of such winding up; and
  • that the Liquidators be at liberty to open, maintain and operate any bank account(s) or account(s) for monies received by them as Liquidators with such bank(s) as they deem fit; and
  • that a Committee of Inspection will not be formed.

Manifold Times previously reported Nicholas James Gronow, director of Heng Tong Fuels & Shipping and Coastal Logistics, filed statutory declarations for both companies stating the firms cannot continue their businesses due to liabilities.

Both companies were reportedly affiliated with troubled Singapore bunker player Coastal Oil (Singapore) Pte Ltd. 

In 2019, several vessels owned by both firms entered the sale & purchase (S&P) market in Singapore.

Related: Singapore: Director declares Heng Tong Fuels & Shipping’s inability to continue business
Related: Heng Tong Fuels & Shipping in court over DBS Bank bunker tanker loan
Related: Singapore: Bunker tanker “Coastal Neptune” arrested
Related: Heng Tong Fuels & Shipping, Coastal Logistics tankers enter S&P market

 

Photo credit: Drew Beamer
Published: 21 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Winding up

Singapore: Liquidator of Nan Shan Maritime Pte Ltd issues notice of dividend

Third interim dividend to admitted unsecured claims of Nan Shan Maritime is payable from 15 July, according to Government Gazette notice.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Drew Beamer

A notice of dividend for Nan Shan Maritime Pte Ltd, which is currently in creditors’ voluntary liquidation, was published on the Government Gazette on Wednesday (15 July). 

The following are the details of the notice:

Name of Company : Nan Shan Maritime (Pte.) Ltd.(In Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation)
Unique Entity No. / Registration No. : 201701967H
Address of Registered Office : 10 Anson Road, #10-10, International Plaza, Singapore 079903
Amount per centum : 5.00 Per Centum of all admitted unsecured, claims
First and Final or Otherwise : Third Interim
When Payable : 15 July 2026
Where Payable : Entitlements will be made by way of cheque.

 

Photo credit: Drew Beamer
Published: 16 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending