Hong Kong: Legal position of jurisdiction following the collapse of OW Bunkers

This information is part of a wider article which offers a broad overview of the legal position across jurisdictions following the collapse of OW Bunkers. View the complete article or alternative jurisdictions.

Leading case

NewOcean Petroleum Co Ltd v. OW Bunker China Ltd and Cosco Petroleum Ltd (11 July 2016, Court of Appeal).

Summary of legal position

In relation to an application to challenge jurisdiction brought by Cosco, the Court of Appeal held that NewOcean as the physical bunker supplier, made out an arguable case of a claim in conversion.

This case is distinguished from the Res Cogitans because, under NewOcean’s terms, NewOcean retained title in the bunkers until it was paid the price in full and it did not grant permission for anyone to consume the bunkers prior to payment.

In permitting the Owner of the vessels to consume the bunkers immediately prior to payment, and by impliedly undertaking that it had a right to grant such permission, Cosco asserted a right inconsistent with the NewOcean’s rights as the owner of the bunkers which gives rise to a claim for conversion by NewOcean.

Contributing authors

Henry Fung/Christie Tsui/Desmond Cheuk, HFW Hong Kong

Sign up to our latest news alerts

Enter your contact details to receive our news and insights.

Specify your role:

Please tick the following box:

All fields required