- The Vestre Landsret ruled on a case in which Stena Oil AB had brought a claim for compensation of approximately $6.5 million against the Monjasa Group.
- The reason for the claim was that one of the companies in the Monjasa Group purchased an oil cargo which was on board a ship in the West African island state.
- Stena Oil AB argued that the Monjasa group had to be aware of this when the oil was bought and transported further and incurred a loss equal to the value of the oil for Stena Oil AB.
- The defendants were justified to assume that the confiscated oil load belonged to Sao Tomé and Príncipe.
The Vestre Landsret ruled on a case in which Stena Oil AB had brought a claim for compensation of approximately $6.5 million against five companies in the Monjasa Group and two directors, reads a press release from domstol.
At the district court’s judgment, the defendants were acquitted of the claim.
Charter to oil shipping
The reason for the claim was that in October 2013, one of the companies in the Monjasa Group purchased an oil cargo which was on board a ship in the West African island state, Sao Tomé and Príncipe. Stena Oil AB had chartered the vessel to ship the company’s oil to West Africa.
In March 2013, the ship was boarded by the Coast Guard on Sao Tomé and Príncipe as the ship attempted to transfer the oil cargo to another vessel in the territorial waters off Sao Tomé and Príncipe.
Oil load confiscated
The Sao Tomé and Príncipe authorities detained both ships, and the courts sentenced the captains to three years in prison and confiscated the oil load. In addition, the ship’s owners and the captains imposed a total fine of approximately €5 million.
On 20 June 2013, the Supreme Court of Sao Tomé and Príncipe finally ruled on the case and upheld the judgment of the first instance.
In August 2013, the authorities of Sao Tomé and Príncipe authorized the sale of the confiscated oil cargo. When the oil purchase agreement was signed, the captains were released and the ships released.
Judgement in violation of fundamental rights
During the case, Stena Oil AB claimed that the company still owned the oil in October 2013.
Stena Oil AB believed that the Saotome judgments were passed in violation of fundamental rights concerning, among other things. the right to a fair trial, the inviolability of property rights and international conventions, including the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Stena Oil AB argued that the Monjasa group and the two directors had to be aware of this when the oil was bought and transported further. Therefore, they incurred a loss equal to the value of the oil for Stena Oil AB.
The defendants pointed out that Sao Tomé and Príncipe are a sovereign state with independent courts. The defendants were, after the judgments and investigations of i.a. Saotomesian right justified to assume that the confiscated oil load belonged to Sao Tomé and Príncipe.
They should not have foreseen that confiscation could be contrary to international law. A private buyer must be able to trust in national law, and international law is a matter between states.
- The High Court considered the case in the first instance and, during the preparation, ruled that the case should essentially be decided according to Saotome law.
- The High Court found that the defendants were not liable to Stena Oil AB by purchasing the confiscated oil cargo from Sao Tomé and Príncipe.
Did you subscribe to our daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Domstol
