Scandinavian Bunkering Case Study

1474 Words6 Pages
Scandinavian Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd, the plaintiff in the High Court is a private company that trades and transports petroleum and some other liquid products whereas MISC Berhad, the defendant in the High Court is a public listed company. Scandinavian Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd appealed to the Federal Court against the decision of Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal had awarded damages to the plaintiff when the contract between the parties was breached. MISC Berhad or the defendant entered into a fixed price bunker contract governed by English law with Marinehub Sdn. Bhd. In the contract, the defendant agreed to purchase and accept a delivery of 102,600mt, +/- 5 % of Marine Fuel Oil (MFO) 380 cst in a fixed period of 3 months on the basis of 34,200 metric tons per month, at the price of USD559.80 per mt. Another contract was entered into by the plaintiff or the Scandinavian Bunkering (Singapore) Pte Ltd with Marinehub where Marinehub would buy the same quantity of MFO at the price of USD 557.50 per mt for the delivery to the defendant’s ships. As a result of global financial crisis, the prices of MFO declined rapidly and thus, the defendant refused to take further delivery of…show more content…
2.2.3 SECTION 56 OF THE MALAYSIAN SALE OF GOODS ACT 1957 In Malaysia, the right of a seller to claim damages from a buyer when there is a non-acceptance of goods is governed by Section 56 of the Sale of Goods Act 1957. A seller can seek for a claim of damages for non-acceptance from a buyer if the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods. However, the Sale of Goods Act 1957 does not mention how damages should be assessed. 2.2.4 SECTION 61 OF THE MALAYSIAN SALE OF GOODS ACT

More about Scandinavian Bunkering Case Study

Open Document