Admiralty Jurisdiction in Nigeria: An in-depth Analysis

The Nigerian Maritime Sector undeniably plays a significant role in the nation’s economic landscape. Recognizing its pivotal importance, the Federal government took decisive action in 2023 by establishing the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy. This recognition underscores the imperative for a comprehensive analysis of admiralty jurisdiction in Nigeria, encompassing both its legal delineations and associated complexities within the country’s legal framework.

Admiralty jurisdiction pertains to the judicial authority vested in a court to adjudicate over matters relating to maritime law, as defined by pertinent statutes and subsidiary legislation. This article seeks to delve into the historical evolution of admiralty jurisdiction in Nigeria, alongside an exploration of the current legal framework that governs the exercise of judicial powers within the nation.

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE HISTORY OF ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION IN NIGERIA

It is indisputable that Nigeria’s historical trajectory is intertwined with colonialism, shaping various aspects of its institutions and systems. The formal establishment of Court systems between 1843 and 1890 marked a significant milestone, laying the groundwork for the evolution of admiralty jurisdiction in Nigeria. Initially, the Supreme Court Act of 1976 limited the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction concerning admiralty matters, yet the Court of Admiralty Act of 1890, through Section 3, expanded such jurisdiction to include the Supreme Court. Additionally, in 1928, the Nigerian Protectorate Admiralty Jurisdiction Order was enacted under the authority vested in the Queen-in-Council by Section 12 of the 1890 Act, granting the Supreme Court of the Colony of Lagos jurisdiction over admiralty causes. Subsequently, by 1933, this jurisdiction extended throughout the protectorate.

The transition to federalism in 1954 precipitated a reconfiguration of the court system, culminating in the original admiralty jurisdiction being vested in the Federal Supreme Court by 1956. However, in 1963, three years post-independence, the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act of 1962 repealed the Federal Supreme Court’s authority over original admiralty jurisdiction, transferring it to regional courts. Furthermore, with the establishment of the Federal High Court in 1973 (initially known as the Federal Revenue Court), admiralty jurisdiction was vested in this new institution. Subsequent amendments to the Federal High Court Act and the Constitution, notably through the Federal High Court (Amendment) Act No. 60 of 1991 and the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Act No. 107 of 1993, solidified the Federal High Court’s exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters, a stance reaffirmed by the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act. Moreover, Section 251(1)(g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, explicitly bestows exclusive original jurisdiction on the Federal High Court.

Related: THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF OIL SPILLAGE IN NIGERIA: CAUSES, CONSEQUENCES, AND REMEDIATION STRATEGIES

LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION IN NIGERIA

It is an established legal principle of law that jurisdiction is granted by statute, and a court’s authority is restricted to the parameters defined by such statutes. Accordingly, a court’s role is to interpret and apply its jurisdiction as defined within the statutes, rather than extending it beyond those confines. Consequently, a court’s jurisdiction is inherently limited to the statutory powers bestowed upon it.

Therefore, an exploration of admiralty jurisdiction inherently centres on the legal framework delineating the scope of jurisdiction conferred upon the respective court. In this regard, it becomes imperative to delve into the Nigerian legal framework concerning admiralty jurisdiction in forthcoming discussions.

1. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, 1999, AS AMENDED

The Constitution stands as the cornerstone of Nigeria’s legal system, embodying its fundamental principles and serving as the highest authority in the country’s legislative hierarchy. Often referred to as the fons et origo, or the source and origin, of all laws within the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Constitution holds paramount importance in shaping the legal landscape of the nation. Consequently, the validity of all laws enacted within the Republic is subject to scrutiny against the backdrop of constitutional provisions.

One crucial provision of the Constitution, found in Section 251(1), grants the Federal High Court exclusive original jurisdiction over a broad spectrum of causes and matters. This jurisdictional mandate extends to:

(g) any admiralty jurisdiction, including shipping and navigation on the River Niger or River Benue and their affluents and on such other inland waterway 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;

2. THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT ACT CAP F12 LFN 2004

The Act serves as the legislative framework for the establishment and operation of the Federal High Court, delineating its structure, authority, and jurisdictional scope. Within its provisions, the Act mirrors the content of Section 251(1)(g) of the Constitution, particularly regarding the jurisdictional domain of admiralty matters.

Moreover, emphasizing the exclusivity of the Federal High Court’s authority over admiralty issues, Section 8(1) of the Act explicitly states the following:

“In so far as jurisdiction is conferred upon the Court in respect of the causes or matters mentioned in the foregoing provisions of this part of the Act, the High Court or any other court of a state or of the federal capital territory Abuja shall, to the extent that jurisdiction is so conferred upon the Court, cease to have jurisdiction in relation to such causes or matters.”

3. THE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION ACT, CAP A5, LFN 2004

The Admiralty Jurisdiction Act was promulgated with the objective of delineating the scope of jurisdiction vested in the Federal High Court concerning admiralty claims and associated matters. As outlined in Section 1 of the Act, the Court is endowed with the authority to adjudicate upon inquiries pertaining to proprietary interests in ships or aircraft, as well as other maritime claims stipulated in Section 2. Additionally, the Act confers jurisdiction upon the Federal High Court to assume authority over admiralty matters that were previously within the purview of other courts in Nigeria prior to the enactment of this legislation. The jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under this Act further encompasses:

1. Any jurisdiction relating to an aircraft or ship which was vested in any other court in Nigeria before the commencement of the Act.
2. Any action or application connected with any cause or matter by any ship owner, aircraft operator or other person under the Merchant Shipping Act or other enactments in relation to a ship or aircraft for the limitation of his liability relating to the shipping or operation of aircraft or other property.
3. A claim for any liability incurred for damage occasioned by oil pollution,
4. Any matter which arises from shipping and navigation on inland waters which have been declared as national waterways,
5. Matters which arise within a Federal port or national airport and its precincts and include claims for loss or damage to goods occurring between the off-loading of goods from a ship or an aircraft and delivery at the consignee’s premises, or during storage or transportation before delivery to the consignee;
6. Transactions, including banking or letters of credit, which involve the importation or exportation of goods to and from Nigeria in a ship or aircraft, whether such importation was carried out or not, regardless of the fact that the transaction is between a bank and its customer;
7. Causes or matters which arise from the composition and powers of all port authorities, airport authorities and the National Maritime Authority;
8. Such criminal causes and matters arising out of or concerned with any of the matters in respect of which jurisdiction is conferred on matters earlier specified.

It is pertinent to note that the jurisdiction of the court concerning the carriage and delivery of goods encompasses the entirety of the process, from the loading of goods onto the vessel for shipment to their delivery to the consignee, irrespective of whether the goods undergo transport on land during this journey or not. Moreover, the jurisdiction of the Court extends to encompass any agreement or arrangement pertaining to the carriage of goods by sea. Additionally, the Act stipulates that the Court’s jurisdiction applies universally to all vessels, regardless of the domicile or residence of their owners, as well as to all other maritime claims, irrespective of their origin.

Furthermore, the Act underscores the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court over admiralty proceedings, both civil and criminal, and it prohibits parties from excluding the jurisdiction of the court through any agreement, provided that:

1. the place of performance, execution delivery or default of same is Nigeria;
2. any of the parties resides or has resided in Nigeria;
3. the payment, under the agreement, whether express or implied, was made or is to be made in Nigeria;
4. where the plaintiff, in an admiralty action or maritime lien, submits to the jurisdiction of the Court and makes a declaration to that effect, or the rem (subject matter) is within Nigerian jurisdiction;
5. where a government, either of the federation or state, is involved in a matter and the government has submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court;
6. Where in respect of any action, a financial consideration accrues in, derived from, brought into or received in Nigeria;
7. By virtue of any convention to which Nigeria is a party, the national court of a state party can assume jurisdiction either mandatorily or discretionarily.
8. In the opinion of the Court, the cause of action ought to be adjudicated in Nigeria.

Regarding the venue for legal proceedings, the Act stipulates that an action may be initiated in any judicial division of the Court where the ship or other pertinent property is situated. This provision ensures flexibility in choosing the appropriate venue for litigation, accommodating the practicalities of the case and ensuring accessibility to justice. It allows litigants to pursue their claims in a jurisdiction closely connected to the subject matter of the dispute, promoting efficiency and fairness in the adjudicatory process. Moreover, this provision acknowledges the mobile nature of maritime assets and ensures that legal actions can be instituted in a convenient location, facilitating expeditious resolution of disputes in the admiralty realm.

4. ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION PROCEDURE RULES 2023.

The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court is vested with the authority to formulate rules of practice and procedure aimed at facilitating the implementation of the provisions outlined in the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act. In exercising this authority, the Chief Judge has consistently promulgated rules governing the practice and procedure of admiralty proceedings.

Before the enactment of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedure Rules of 2023, the 2011 Rules governed the initiation and conduct of admiralty proceedings in Nigeria. However, with the introduction of the 2023 Rules, the previous set of rules was repealed and replaced, incorporating significant enhancements. Notable among these enhancements are:

1. Improved Clarity and Accessibility: The 2023 Rules were crafted with a focus on enhancing clarity and accessibility, ensuring that legal practitioners and litigants can readily understand and navigate the procedural requirements governing admiralty proceedings.
2. Streamlined Procedures: The new rules aim to streamline procedures, reducing unnecessary delays and enhancing the efficiency of admiralty litigation. By providing clear guidelines and deadlines, the 2023 Rules promote expeditious resolution of disputes.
3. Enhanced Provisions for Case Management: The 2023 Rules introduce enhanced provisions for case management, empowering the Court to effectively manage the progress of admiralty cases. This includes mechanisms for case conferences, pre-trial procedures, and the appointment of case managers to oversee proceedings.
4. Incorporation of Modern Practices: The 2023 Rules reflect contemporary legal practices and standards, incorporating provisions that align with international best practices in admiralty law. This ensures that Nigeria’s admiralty jurisdiction remains abreast of global developments and remains attractive to maritime stakeholders.

Overall, the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedure Rules of 2023 represent a significant advancement in the regulation of admiralty proceedings in Nigeria, providing a robust framework to facilitate fair, efficient, and expeditious resolution of maritime disputes.

See Also: Taxation of the Digital Economy in Nigeria: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies

CONCLUSION

In Nigeria, jurisdiction is bestowed by statute, signifying that the authority of courts, including admiralty jurisdiction vested in the Federal High Court, pertains to the capacity of the Court to adjudicate upon claims and issues delineated by the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act. The enactment of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Rules of 2023 is poised to significantly augment the proficient exercise of the Court’s judicial powers. This legislative development is anticipated to fortify the legal framework governing admiralty matters, thus fostering more efficient and equitable resolution of maritime disputes within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.