Maritime claims also referred to as admiralty claims, cover a broad spectrum of legal disputes and issues arising from activities related to the sea, shipping, and marine commerce. These claims usually involve matters such as vessel ownership and registration, ship mortgages, marine insurance, carriage of goods by sea, collision and salvage operations, personal injury or loss of life at sea, pollution, and environmental damage, maritime liens, and disputes over freight, demurrage, and charter party agreements.
In Nigeria, maritime claims are primarily governed by the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1991 (AJA), which vests exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters in the Federal High Court. The court’s jurisdiction extends to both domestic and international maritime disputes, ensuring compliance with national and international maritime regulations. In some cases, arbitration and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms are also utilized to resolve maritime disputes efficiently.
Nature of Maritime Claims
Maritime claims arise in connection with the ownership, possession, mortgage, and operation of a ship. These claims are classified into Proprietary maritime claims and General maritime claims under Section 2 of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act.
1. Proprietary Maritime Claims
These claims directly affect the ship (Res) and include cases related to:
- Ownership, possession, or mortgage of a ship or its shares.
- Disputes between co-owners over ship possession, operation, or earnings.
- Enforcement of court judgments against a ship.
- Interest claims related to proprietary maritime matters.
2. General Maritime Claims
These claims arise from the functioning and operation of a ship and include cases related to:
- Damage caused by or sustained by a ship.
- Loss of life or personal injury due to ship defects or negligence.
- Loss or damage to cargo carried by a ship.
- Claims related to contracts for carriage of goods or passengers.
- Salvage, towage, and pilotage claims.
- Costs related to ship construction, maintenance, or supplies.
- Port and harbor dues or liabilities.
- Insurance-related claims for ships or cargo.
- Crew wages and employer obligations.
- Seizure, forfeiture, or condemnation of a ship or its cargo.
- Enforcement of arbitral awards related to maritime disputes.
These claims collectively define the scope of admiralty jurisdiction in resolving maritime disputes. This distinction is important for litigants as it determines the appropriate legal procedure for enforcing claims.
Overview of Maritime Liens
A ship is legally considered real property, not personal property, and possesses a legal identity separate from its owners. As a result, certain claims remain attached to the ship even after a change in ownership. These claims, known as Liens, are recognized under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, which categorizes them into: Maritime Liens and Statutory Liens.
1. Maritime Liens
Under Section 5(2)(3) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, a maritime lien follows the ship, meaning that the plaintiff’s rights remain intact even if the ship is sold to a third party or there is a change in its ownership.
These claims include:
- Claims related to salvage, including life, cargo, or wreck found on land.
- Claims for damages caused by a ship.
- Claims by the master or crew for unpaid wages
- Claims by the master for disbursements made on behalf of the ship
2. Statutory Liens
Unlike maritime liens, statutory liens arise by operation of law and typically require legal action for enforcement. They include:
- Claims for the supply of necessaries (e.g., fuel, provisions).
- Claims for ship repairs.
- Mortgage claims and other financial obligations.
While a maritime lien automatically gives rise to an action in rem (a claim against the ship itself), a statutory lien may only result in an action in rem if the ship’s beneficial owner remains the relevant party. Otherwise, the claim may proceed as an action in personam (against the owner rather than the ship).
So, when a claim arises, the legal representative of the plaintiff must carefully determine the nature of the claim and the appropriate legal procedure. A Statement of Claim must be drafted clearly to establish the cause of action and must ensure that the claim is prosecuted in the correct jurisdiction and under the correct legal framework.
Legal Framework that Governs Maritime Claim in Nigeria
Several laws govern the transportation of goods and passengers, mineral resource utilization, commerce, and navigation on Nigeria’s waters. These legislations provide the legal framework for maritime activities, environmental protection, and the jurisdiction of maritime disputes.
1. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended)
The Constitution grants the Federal Government ownership of minerals, mineral oils, and natural gas, including those in Nigeria’s territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zone. It also grants exclusive jurisdiction to the Federal High Court over admiralty matters, including shipping, navigation, federal ports, and carriage by sea.
2. Admiralty Jurisdiction Act (AJA) 1991
The AJA defines the scope of the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction over maritime claims. It covers issues related to the carriage and delivery of goods from loading to final delivery, whether transported by land or sea. It covers agreements connected to the carriage of goods by sea, even if the contract is unexecuted.
3. Merchant Shipping Act 2007
The Act regulates merchant shipping operations, including ship registration, labour matters, and maritime safety. It governs liabilities in ship collisions, with liability apportioned based on the degree of fault. It also limits the timeframe for filing maritime claims to two years from the date of the incident.
4. Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) Act 2007
The Act establishes NIMASA, which is the government agency responsible for maritime safety, security, and pollution control. It regulates ship registration, seafarer certification, shipping development, and search and rescue operations. It also enforces international maritime conventions ratified by Nigeria.
5. The Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), 1926
This act incorporates international conventions governing the rights and obligations of carriers and shippers in maritime contracts.
Jurisdiction and Mode of Resolving Maritime Disputes
The Federal High Court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate maritime claims in Nigeria. This authority is derived from Section 251(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act of 1991.
Section 7(1) (g) of the Federal High Court Act 1973 provides that, “The Court shall to the exclusion of any other Court have original jurisdiction to try civil causes and matters connected with or pertaining to –
(g) any admiralty matter, including shipping and navigation on the River Niger or River Benue and their affluents and on such other inland waterways as may be designated by any enactment to be an International Waterway, all Federal Ports, including the constitution and powers of the Ports authorities for Federal ports and carriage by sea.”
These disputes can be resolved through different legal mechanisms, depending on the nature of the claim, contractual agreements, and jurisdictional considerations. The primary methods of resolving maritime disputes include:
1. Litigation
This involves filing a claim at the Federal High Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act. Litigation is often used for cases involving:
- Ship arrests and enforcement of maritime liens.
- Cargo damage or loss claims.
- Disputes over ship ownership, mortgage, or charter agreements.
- Enforcement of local maritime regulations and international conventions.
Court proceedings provide a structured legal process but can be time-consuming and costly.
2. Arbitration
Many maritime contracts such as charter parties, bill of lading agreements, and shipbuilding contracts include arbitration clauses, requiring disputes to be settled outside the courts. Maritime arbitration in Nigeria is often conducted under institutions such as:
- The Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA).
- The Nigerian Maritime Arbitration Association (NMAA).
Arbitration is preferred for its confidentiality, flexibility, and efficiency, making it a popular choice in commercial shipping disputes.
3. Mediation and Conciliation (Alternative Dispute Resolution – ADR)
ADR mechanisms such as mediation and conciliation allow parties to negotiate a mutually beneficial settlement with the help of a neutral third party. ADR is increasingly encouraged for:
- Disputes between shipowners and port authorities.
- Conflicts involving cargo claims.
- Contractual disagreements where maintaining commercial relationships is crucial.
ADR is faster, cost-effective, and less adversarial than litigation or arbitration.
4. International Arbitration
For disputes involving foreign parties, international shipping contracts, or cross-border trade, arbitration is often conducted under globally recognized institutions, such as:
- London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA).
- International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
- United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
International arbitration ensures that disputes are handled by maritime law experts and allows for the enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
Each dispute-resolution method has its advantages, and the choice depends on factors such as contractual agreements, costs, urgency, and the need for enforceability in international trade.
Initiating Maritime Claims in Nigeria
Maritime claims are commenced by filing an originating process at the Federal High Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters. For in rem actions (claims against a vessel or cargo itself), the ship or cargo must be within Nigerian territorial waters at the time the claim is filed. This ensures the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Claimants may be required to provide security for costs to cover potential legal expenses incurred by the defendant if the claim is unsuccessful. Defendants, particularly in cases involving ship arrests, may provide counter-security to secure the release of a detained vessel, ensuring the claim does not unfairly disrupt commercial activities.
Time Limits for Maritime Claims
Maritime claims are subject to statutory limitation periods, which vary based on the nature of the claim. For example:
- Cargo damage claims under a bill of lading must typically be filed within a specified period (usually one year from the date of delivery or when delivery should have occurred).
- Personal injury claims arising from maritime incidents generally have a limitation period, depending on the applicable maritime laws and conventions.
It is advisable to adhere to these time limits, as failure to file within the prescribed period may result in the claim being statute-barred, preventing legal action.
Enforcement of Maritime Claims
Once a plaintiff has successfully formulated a maritime claim, presented material facts, and led sufficient evidence at trial, the court will enter judgment in their favor. It is a well-established legal principle that a judgment, once delivered, becomes immediately enforceable unless it is set aside or discharged.
The enforcement of court judgments and arbitral awards, including those related to maritime claims, is governed by the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act (Cap 407, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990).
A successful claimant has several options for enforcing a judgment. One method involves obtaining a writ that authorizes the seizure and sale of the debtor’s assets to satisfy the judgment debt. Another approach allows the creditor to recover funds held by a third party, such as a bank, on behalf of the debtor.
In some cases, a charge may be placed on the debtor’s property to secure payment. If specific goods are involved, the court may issue an order compelling their return or requiring compensation for their value. Additionally, enforcement can take the form of a committal order, which ensures compliance by compelling or restraining certain actions.
When a debtor is unable to meet financial obligations, bankruptcy proceedings may be initiated in the case of an individual, while a corporate entity may face winding-up proceedings. In instances where other enforcement methods have failed, a writ of sequestration may be used to seize the debtor’s property or assets.
Conclusion
Maritime claims are an important part of Nigeria’s economy, as the country relies heavily on maritime trade for imports and exports. The legal system, guided by the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act and international conventions, provides a strong foundation for resolving disputes in the sector. This ensures that shipowners, cargo owners, and other stakeholders have legal protection when conflicts arise.
However, challenges such as slow court processes, difficulties in enforcing judgments, and confusion over jurisdiction often delay the resolution of maritime claims. To improve the system, encouraging alternative dispute resolution methods like arbitration and mediation, will speed up the court processes, and ensure that judgments are properly enforced.
