Rhein Mass Und See & Ors V. Rivway Lines Limited (1998)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

OGUNDARE, J.S.C.

The plaintiff is a shipping company incorporated in Nigeria; it has its head office in Lagos. The plaintiff offers its services to other shipping companies in and outside Nigeria. The 1st defendant (hereinafter is referred to as defendant simpliciter) is a German shipping company with its registered office in Breman, Germany. The 2nd defendant is a German bank.

In September 1973 the plaintiff and the 1st defendant entered into a joint venture agreement by which they established a joint venture shipping company known as North Europe West African Lines Limited (NEWALINES, for short). Under the agreement, the plaintiff was appointed general agent to all NEWALINES Vessels that called at West African Ports and was entitled to remuneration by way of agency commission of 1.5 per centum for all inward and outward bound freights. In February 1978, the said joint-venture agreement was mutually terminated and, upon accounts being taken of the joint venture business, the plaintiff claimed that a sum of Dm 262,800 was due and payable to it for services rendered under the agreement to various vessels.

As the defendant would not pay, the plaintiff on December 23, 1986 issued a writ of summons out of the registry of the Federal High Court Lagos claiming, as per paragraph 46 of its statement of claim filed on 12th March 1987, as hereunder:

“(a) The sum of DM 262,800 plus interest at the rate of 15% until judgment and 5% thereafter until the total judgment debt is liquidated jointly and severally from the 1st and 2nd defendants and

(b) The sum of N30,120,33 from the 1st defendant as per the writ of summons OR 65% of the sum of N30,120,33, being the 1st defendant’s share of the loss and/or litigation/Court expenses on the aforesaid NEWALINES ‘vessels operation,”

Rather than file a statement of defence in reply to the plaintiffs pleadings, the defendant brought a motion praying the trial High Court for orders:

“I. That the processes originating this suit, that is to say the particulars of claim and statement of claim be set aside on the grounds that even if all the facts alleged therein were true (which is not conceded) the plaintiff cannot maintain these proceedings because the cause of action is time-barred.

(II) That this Suit be set aside on the grounds that the court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this case, the case not been (sic) one properly cognizable within S 7 of the Federal High Court Act.

Alternatively

(III) That these proceedings be stayed on the grounds that the subject matter of dispute vi: Monies lodged in the 2nd defendant’s Bank in West Germany, is not within the jurisdiction and the appropriate and convenient Forum for the proper adjudication of this suit is West Germany.

(IV) That these proceedings be transformed to the Lagos Stale High Court on the grounds that this Honorable Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the plaintiffs claim by virtue of S 7 of the Federal High Court Act.”

After taking arguments from learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial Judge, in a well considered ruling, found:

“(i) On the issue of jurisdiction, I hold that this matter is one in respect of which this court is clothed with Admiralty jurisdiction under section 7(1)(d) of the Federal High Court Act 1973; the subject matter being one concerning disbursement in respect of ships – a matter concerning which a High Court in England will under section 1(1)(b) of the Administration of Justice Act (of England) 1956 assume Admiralty jurisdiction: