Bunker supplier Minerva Bunkering has resolved its dispute with the Norvic group over an unpaid fuel bill, according to Ship & Bunker. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed.
According to Ship & Bunker, Minerva’s case in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York against Norvic founder, chairman, and group CEO Ashfaque J. Rahman, along with his wife Mahween Rahman, was voluntarily dismissed on Monday. The dismissal was made with prejudice, meaning the claims cannot be brought again, and each side is bearing its own legal costs, court records cited by Ship & Bunker show.
Origins of the Dispute
The case traced back to a $230,040.26 debt for the supply of 498.528 mt of VLSFO delivered to the vessel Alexandris at Singapore, Ship & Bunker reports. Minerva initiated legal action against Norvic Maritime Holdings and related companies in March over the unpaid amount.
According to Ship & Bunker, the English High Court entered a default judgment against Norvic Maritime Holdings in April under the parent company’s guarantee. Minerva’s New York complaint reportedly put the judgment debt at $288,133.58 or more as of June 25.
Dispute Spread Across Three Jurisdictions
Ship & Bunker reports that Minerva then applied in Ontario to enforce the judgment in Norvic’s home jurisdiction. In August, the supplier filed the New York complaint seeking to hold the Rahmans personally liable, alleging that the group’s value had been shifted beyond creditors’ reach through the sale of its dry bulk platform.
According to Ship & Bunker, those allegations were never tested in court, and the dismissal ends the case without any finding against the Rahmans. The outlet notes that the status of the Ontario recognition application was not immediately clear at the time of reporting.
Does This Matter to You?
Disputes over unpaid bunker bills and the legal routes suppliers pursue to recover debts are a recurring feature of the bunkering trade. This case, as reported by Ship & Bunker, illustrates how a single unpaid invoice for fuel supplied at one port can escalate into multi-jurisdictional litigation involving default judgments, enforcement actions, and personal liability claims against company executives.
For those involved in bunker supply contracts, credit arrangements, or counterparty risk assessment, the case is a reminder of how payment disputes can unfold when debts go unresolved. The confidential settlement means the underlying allegations about asset restructuring were never adjudicated, leaving no legal precedent from this particular matter.
Gulf Bunkering does not provide operational or security guidance. This article is for informational purposes only. Operators should consult flag state authorities, P&I clubs, and relevant advisories for decisions relating to transit planning.
Sources: Ship & Bunker
