An Appraisal of the Features of Admiralty Jurisdiction under Maritime Law

Mantinkang Fmantinkang Formbasso Lawrence (Phd)Ormbasso Lawrenced

doi:10.31142/ijtsrd21587

Abstract

An Appraisal of the Features of Admiralty Jurisdiction under Maritime Law

Highlights

The distinction between claims in rem and claims inpersonam is a unique to admiralty courts
Maritime claims under the admiralty jurisdiction are covered by the 1999 Arrest Convention[5], which extends to maritime claims whether or not the claims gave rise to a maritime lien
(1981) AC 221, p 234 It should be remembered that under American admiralty law, unlike the English admiralty law, ship repairs is a maritime claim which gives rise to a maritime lien From above we discovered that under English law, ship repair is only a statutory right in rem which became a statutory lien in rem following the issue of a claim form

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The distinction between claims in rem and claims inpersonam is a unique to admiralty courts. Unlike the admiralty attachment (maritime attachment applicable in the civil law system), it does not place the property under the jurisdiction of the court, nor does it permit execution against it by way of judicial sale, enforcing a final judgement[37]. It is clear that a claimant is highly protected under the civil law system than under the common law system due to the availability of the quasi in rem jurisdiction under the former This is to say that maritime claimants in Cameroon are protected as they can rely solely on maritime attachment[39] and not a freezing injunction for security pending a judgement.

Laws Applicable to Maritime Liens and Conflict of Laws

Connection between a claim and the defendant when a cause of action arose

Conclusion