Effective Ways to Recover Debts Using the Claims Framework under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act of Nigeria
Abstract
Recognising the transnational nature of maritime operations and the challenges posed by constantly mobile vessels, this Article looks at the legal mechanisms available for debt recovery under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act (AJA) and the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedure Rules (AJPR) 2023 in Nigeria. It looks at the various maritime claims under Sections 2 and 5 of the AJA, that will likely give rise to actions for recovery of debts such as unpaid charter hire, bunker supply charges, port dues, towage fees, ship repair invoices etc. It also evaluates the enforcement procedures like commencing actions in personam, in rem, or as hybrid claims, noting that an action in rem, accompanied by vessel arrest, remains the most potent tool for securing maritime debts. Procedural rules for commencement, arrest, release, and enforcement under the AJPR were set out, with emphasis on the arrest regime, provision of security, and court-ordered sale of vessels. This article concludes that the AJA and AJPR provide a robust, specialised, and commercially effective framework for maritime debt recovery, enabling creditors to utilise the vessel itself as security and thereby surmount jurisdictional and enforcement challenges.
- Introduction
The maritime sector being international in nature, with vessels moving constantly across jurisdictions, makes recovery of debts and the enforcement of claims complex. However, the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, Cap A5, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (L.F.N.) 2004 (“AJA”) and the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedural Rules (AJPR) 2023 offers a robust statutory framework that provides both substantive and procedural tools for the recovery of debts arising from maritime claims.
I critically examine effective ways to utilise the claims framework under the AJA to recover debts, and the procedure laid down in the AJPR to commence Admiralty proceedings to enforce these claims.
- Maritime Claims for Debt Recovery
The scope of admiralty jurisdiction, as detailed in Section 2 AJA, encompasses a wide scope of maritime claims broadly categorised in 3 claims. They are as follows;
Proprietary Claim – By section 2(2) AJA, a proprietary maritime claim only covers:
- Claims over a ship’s possession, ownership, or mortgage (including mortgages on freight).
- Disputes between co-owners about possession, ownership, operation, or earnings.
- Enforcement of a judgment against a ship or property in an admiralty in rem case.
- Interest relating to any of the above claims.
General Maritime Claim – By section 2(3) AJA, a general maritime claim refers to the following:
(a) Claim for damage caused by a ship, whether from collision or any other cause.
(b) Claim for damage suffered by a ship.
(c) Claim for death or personal injury caused by a defect in the ship or its equipment.
(d) Claim (including death or injury) caused by an act or omission of:
- (i) The ship’s owner or charterer,
- (ii) A person in possession or control of the ship, or
- (iii) Someone for whose wrongful act that owner/charterer/controller is responsible.
(e) Claim for loss of or damage to cargo carried by the ship.
(f) Claim under an agreement for carriage of goods/people by ship, or for using or hiring a ship.
(g) Claim for salvage services, including saving life or recovering cargo/wreck on land.
(h) Claim relating to general average (shared contribution for losses voluntarily incurred to save the voyage).
(i) Claim for pilotage fees.
(j) Claim for towage of a ship or an aircraft while afloat.
(k) Claim for goods, materials, or services supplied to a ship for its operation/maintenance (e.g., fuel, stevedoring, and lighterage).
(l) Claim for ship construction, including before launch.
(m) Claim for ship alteration, repairs, or equipment; also dock charges/dues.
(n) Claim for port, harbour, canal, or light tolls/charges, or any similar fees related to the ship.
(o) Claim under a bottomry loan (loan secured on a ship or cargo, repayable on successful voyage).
(p) Claim by master/shipper/charterer/agent for disbursements made for the ship.
(q) Claim for unpaid insurance premiums or mutual insurance calls relating to the ship or its cargo.
(r) Claim by the master or crew for:
- (i) Wages, or
- (ii) Any other employment-related sums owed under contract or law.
(s) Claim for forfeiture/condemnation of a ship or cargo, or for restoration after seizure.
(t) Claim to enforce, or arising from, an arbitral award (including foreign awards) on a proprietary or general maritime claim.
(u) Claim for interest on any of the claims in (a)–(t).
Maritime Lien – Maritime liens in Nigeria are limited to the four categories in Section 5(3) AJA:
- Salvage
- Damage done by a ship
- Crew wages
- Master’s disbursements
From these categories of maritime claims outlined above, debts in maritime matters typically arise from claims relating to the carriage of goods or passengers by sea, charter party agreements, towage or pilotage services, the supply of goods and services to a ship, mortgage or ownership disputes, and damage caused by or to a ship. Notably, Section 2(3) (f) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act expressly includes claims “in respect of goods or materials supplied to a ship for her operation or maintenance,” which represents one of the most common bases for maritime debt recovery actions. Consequently, suppliers of bunkers, spare parts, provisions, and ship chandlers owed sums by ship owners, charterers, or managers may properly frame their claims as maritime claims under the AJA. Similarly, claims for unpaid charter hire, outstanding freight or demurrage, bunker supply debts, port dues or agency fees, and ship repair or maintenance invoices all constitute recoverable maritime debts within the purview of the AJA.
- Admiralty Jurisdiction
Section 1 of the AJA vests exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters in the Federal High Court. There are 3 forms of Admiralty action. They are as follows;
- Claims in Personam – By Section 5(1)[i], a claimant can always sue in personam against the owner of the vessel or the company liable. An action in personam lies against the person or entity owing the debt, typically the ship owner or charterer.
- Claims in Rem – By Section 5(2)[ii], a claimant can maintain an action in rem against the vessel or the res. An action in rem is a very powerful recovery tool as the vessel is arrested as pre Judgment security. It is worthy of note that an action in rem is only allowed for certain proprietary claims and maritime liens. An action in rem may be maintained even if the owner of the ship is not domiciled in Nigeria, provided the ship is within Nigerian territorial waters when the writ is issued. An action in rem allows creditors to secure maritime debts by arresting the debtor’s ship before it sails, ensuring the ship serves as security for the eventual judgment.
- Hybrid Claims – By Section 5(4), other general maritime claims in section 2 can be brought in rem against the Ship itself and in personam against the owner of the vessel or the company liable, provided that the liable person (“relevant person”) was the owner/charterer/in control when the cause arose and is still the beneficial owner of all shares or a demise charterer when the action is filed; or any other ship fully owned by the same relevant person at the time of filing (sister-ship arrest)[iii].
The first strategic decision a Claimant must decide is whether to frame the action in personam against the party liable or in rem (against a vessel) or hybrid against the vessel and the relevant person.
- Commencing a Debt Recovery Claim
The Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedure Rules (AJPR) 2023, made pursuant to the AJA, govern the process of debt recovery in Court. By Order 3 Rule 1 AJPR, Admiralty proceedings may be commenced by either a Writ of Summons or an Originating Summons. However, there are specific provisions like Order 3 Rule 3(1) AJPR and Order 3 Rule 4(1) AJPR specifically provides that an admiralty claim in rem and in personam shall be commenced by writ of summons. By virtue of Order 3 Rule 8 of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedure Rules (AJPR)[iv], any action not required by the Rules to be commenced by writ of summons shall be commenced by Originating Summons, using Form 5 with such modifications or variations as the circumstances may require.
It is also worth noting that by Order 21 Rule 7 AJPR[v] where the Admiralty Jurisdiction of the Lower Court is properly invoked, any procedural defect in the mode of commencement does not nullify the proceedings. The emphasis of the law is on substantial justice, not procedural technicality.
Moreover, Order 1 Rule 1(2) AJPR[vi] permits recourse to the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules where the Admiralty Rules are silent or incomplete.
For an action in rem, the claimant must identify the relevant ship or sister ship to which the claim relates. Upon filing, the court may, on an ex parte application, issue a warrant of arrest under Order 7 Rule 1 AJPR, securing the vessel pending determination of the claim. The provision for arrest is one of the most potent debt recovery tools available in maritime law, effectively compelling owners to settle outstanding debts to secure release of their vessel.
Order 9 Rule 6(3) AJPR provides that where a ship or other property has been arrested and the owners thereof have failed to provide bail for the release of same for a period of not less than 60 days from the date of the arrest, the Court may, on the application of the arrestor or other interested party order that the ship or other property be sold by the Admiralty Marshal and the proceeds of sale paid into an interest-yielding fixed deposit account in the name of the Admiralty Marshal pending further orders of the Court.
- Arrest as Security for Debt Recovery
The principle underpinning the action in rem is that the ship itself is treated as the wrongdoer or debtor. The Court may, therefore, order the arrest of the vessel to secure the claim. The Arrest provision has a strong deterrent and settlement effect. Ship owners are usually unwilling to allow their vessels to remain under arrest due to daily losses from demurrage, idle crew costs, and charter cancellations. Consequently, vessel arrest often results in prompt payment or negotiated settlement.
Where the vessel is arrested, the owner may secure its release by providing satisfactory security, often in the form of a bank guarantee or a protection and indemnity (P&I) club letter of undertaking, covering the claimed amount and costs.
The AJA and AJPR thereby create a balance of interests, protecting the claimant’s right to security while ensuring that legitimate ship owners can continue operations upon provision of adequate substitute security.
- Enforcement of Judgment and Settlement
Once judgment is obtained, enforcement proceeds in the usual manner, either by sale of the arrested vessel or by garnishee proceedings against funds in Nigeria. Even though many cases conclude through consensual settlement once, the ship is arrested. Thus, the threat or execution of an arrest serves both as a legal and commercial instrument for effective debt recovery.
- Conclusion
The Admiralty Jurisdiction Act provides a specialised, powerful, and efficient framework for the recovery of maritime debts in Nigeria. By properly classifying claims under the Act, leveraging the action in rem, and promptly obtaining arrest orders, practitioners can ensure that their clients’ maritime debts are secured and recovered effectively. In the Maritime industry, where ships may sail away overnight, speed, precision, and procedural mastery are the lawyer’s most valuable assets. The AJA and the AJPR’s structure ensures that maritime creditors need not chase debtors across borders, as the ship itself, under Nigerian law, stands as security for the debt.
[i] Section 5(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1991 provides thus; “Subject to section 6 of this Decree, an action in personam may be brought in the Court in all cases within the admiralty jurisdiction of the Court”.
[ii] Section 5(2) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1991 provides thus; “In the case of a claim as is mentioned in section 2 (2) (a) or section 2 (3) (u), or a question as is mentioned in section 2 (2) (6) of this Decree, an action in rem may be brought in the Court against the ship or property in connection with which the claim or question arises”.
[iii] Geepee Ind. (Nig.) Ltd. v. The MV Kota Manis (2025) 15 NWLR (Pt. 2007) 143 SC, P. 166, paras. F-G
[iv] Order 3 Rule 8 of the Admiralty Jurisdiction procedure Rules provides thus; “(I) Any action not required by these Rules to be commenced by writ of summons shall be commenced by originating summons and shall be as in Form 5, with such modifications or variations as circumstances may require. (2) an originating summons shall be accompanied by: (a) an affidavit setting out the facts relied upon; (b) copies of all the exhibits to be relied upon; and (c) a written address”.
[v] Order 21 Rule 7(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedural Rules provides thus; “Where in beginning or purporting to begin any proceeding or at any stage in the course of or in connection with any proceeding, there has by reason of anything done or left undone, been failure to comply with the requirements of these Rules, whether in respect of time, place, manner, form or content or in any other respect, the failure may be treated as an irregularity and if so treated, will not nullify the proceedings, or any document, judgment or order therein”.
[vi] Order 1 Rule 1(2) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Procedural Rules provides thus; “The Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules shall apply subject to the provisions of these Rules”.
Contributor
