The Jurisdictional Dispute Over Seafarer Wages: Revisiting the Decision of the Court of Appeal in the Vessel Sam Purpose (Ex Mt. Tapti) & Anor. V. Amarjeet Singh Bains & 6 Ors.

Abstract

Until recently, disputes over payment or non-payment of seafarer wages were characterized as a Maritime lien enforceable by an action in rem under the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. However, the decision of the Court of Appeal in The Vessel Sam Purpose (EX MT. TAPTI) & Anor. V. Amarjeet Singh Bains & 6 Ors appears to have altered the previously settled position of the law. In that case, the Court of Appeal in its wisdom, held that by the provisions of Section 254C (1) (a) and (k) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), it is the National Industrial Court that has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes for unpaid crew wages. One of the implications of this decision is that crew wages are no longer a part of maritime claims under the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. It also means that Sections 2(3) (r) and 5(3)(c ) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act that listed crew wages as a maritime claim are no longer tenable under the law. This paper shall revisit the decision of the Court of Appeal in The Vessel Sam Purpose and compare it with the legally acceptable definition and scope of admiralty jurisdiction in order to show where the Court missed the point in its determination of the jurisdictional dispute over the wages of seafarers. Rather than finding that Section 254C (1) (a) and (k) of the Constitution divested the Federal High Court of jurisdiction over claims for seafarer's wages, this paper proposes that the Court of Appeal ought to have applied the purposive rule of statutory interpretation to Sections 251 (1) (g) and 254C (1) of the Constitution, to the effect that where unpaid seafarer’s wages is the subject matter of a suit, such action will invoke the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court if it is instituted in rem, but where it is commenced in personam, the National Industrial Court will have exclusive jurisdiction.