7/30/2019 lein

1/20

Maritime Liens and Mortgages

By

*Sani M. Adam

1. INTRODUCTION

One of the most important means of interaction between nation states is

trade and an important aspect of international trade is the shipment of

goods. In fact, the ability of nation states to maintain harmonious and

beneficial trade relations with each other depends on the efficacy and

standard of service rendered by the shipping industry, we are informed.1

Ships by their vast size, weight and sophistication coupled with the

vulnerable nature of their voyages are open to varied risks traversing

many seas and continents of the world. This exercise, we are told, often

results in far reaching legal consequences where the ships are engaged in

commercial enterprise, whether as passenger and for Cargo vessel 2.

Hence, there must be understanding between nations particularly 0; the

legal issues, rights, obligations, immunities, benefits etc arising from the

innumerable and diverse situations arising during the course of the

voyage of the ships. These interests, says a writer, sometimes been

exposed to extinction or enforcement in foreign jurisdictions under laws

different from those applicable in the vessel's state of registration. 3 It is

such developments and the difficult experiences of parties involved that

led to the various International Conventions on Maritime liens and

mortgages. 4 These conventions were targeted at establishing uniform

rules for the recognition and enforcement of these varied interests within

the corpus jurist of the contracting and ratifying nations. The varied

interests which are legally recognisable as attaching and enforceable

against a ship or vessel have been classified into proprietary rights

because they affect the paper intends to examine some of the prominent

of such proprietary rights and interests in vessels, i.e. Maritime Liens and

67 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

2/20

Mortgages, their meaning, evolution, nature, types and the various

international Conventions on Maritime liens and mortgages.

2.0 MEANING, EVOLUTION AND NATURE OF MARITIME LIENS

2.1 Meaning of Lien:

Authors have offered different definitions to lien, though not substantially

differing. A lien has been defined as "A right to retain lawful possession of

a property of another until a claim by the person in possession against

the owner is met". 5 The author explaining further said, "It is sometimes

regarded as a form of 'self help' by the person claiming the lien in order

to induce the owner of the property to comply with his obligation to pay

or otherwise satisfy the claim of the other". 6

t.C, Ilogu defines a lien as

"that interest or right in the property of another which renders

or constitutes that property as a 'security' for any claim arising

from such identified interest or right". Usually, he explains,

"such interest or right arises from some commercial transaction

which imposes an obligation or Duty on the party who 'owns'

the property (the lienor). Where such obligation or duty remains

unfulfilled, the other party to the transaction (lienee) may

exercise the right of 'lien' over the identified property belonging

to the party in default until the obligation, duty or act is fulfilled

or remedied". 7

The foregoing therefore shows that the lien is connected to the asset or

property e.g. Vessel or Cargo or freight or in other cases, even landed

property, vehicles etc. The lien attaches to the property even where the

property is not in the hand or possession of the owner, but in possession

of the lienee exercising the right of lien or a third party.

68 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

3/20

The distinction between a liens and a mortgage lies in the nature of the

rights, for they are indeed similar. While the right of lien does not vest,

but remains dormant or silent until exercised, a mortgage specifically

vests on creation and describes its remedies from the moment it is

created and with either the express agreement or understanding of the

parties thereto as to the application of those remedies. 8

There are several types of lien which includes: Possessory lien, statutory

lien, equitable lien and maritime lien. Our concern is Maritime lien, but we

shall briefly consider other types first in order to bring out clearly, the

distinction between maritime lien and other types.

Possessory lien as suggested from the name, arises mainly from a party

being in 'Possession' of the property at the time of its accrual, and in most

J urisdiction, at the time of enforcement. The lien is lost once the party

claiming damages by asserting the right loses 'possession' of the

property. 9 This feature of actual possession distinguishes it from Maritime

lien in which case the lien travels with the property or "res" and does not

depend on P ossession. This type of lien (Possessory) is usually exercised

by ship builders, ship repairers or vehicle dealers who seek to retain the

vessel or vehicle until the cost of construction, repair, charges or purchase

price have been paid.

However, it has been established that what amounts to been "in

Possession" of a vessel is a question of fact in any given case, in The

Narada 10 even though the master and crew remained on board, brando J .

found on the facts that the repairer has a possessory lien while in The

Gregos" where it was held that the plaintiffs repairers who carried out

repairs while the vessel was berthed near Newcastle were not "in

possession" and had no right to exercise the remedy of "self-help" by

removing engine parts. In Nigeria, United Kingdom and most common law

nations, the lien exercised by ship repairer is a possessory lien and also a

69 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

4/20

statutory lien. Under the United States law, it is a maritime lien who is not

dependent on possession. 12

A statutory lien is one that is created by statute where such statute

enables a party to a transaction to exercise a right attachable to the

property of another e.g. right of retention of the unpaid seller of goods by

the Lagos State Sale of Goods Act, 1972 and the Nigerian Admiralty

J urisdiction Act, 199113 which confers a right of action "in rem" against

the vessel in cases which do not give rise to maritime liens once certain

statutory condition are satisfied.

A fundamental difference between statutory lien and maritime lien is that

the statutory right does not come into being until a writ is issued against

the "res". 14

An Equitable lien on the other hand may be implied or imposed into a

relationship owing to fairness or wrong conduct. Thus it is a right

enforceable against the property of a party who create it in a transaction

and those who acquire interest subsequently (third parties) in such

property with notice of such an interest.

This type of lien does not depend on "possession" as in the case of

possessory

Lien. 15

2.1 Maritime Lien

Maritime liens are of a different nature from those noticed above and they

operate in a different way. A Maritime lien/we are informed, is a privileged

claim on a ship, or on her Cargo, or on either both of these and the

freight, in respect of service done to or injury caused by them. 16 A

maritime lien cannot generally exist in respect of a foreign state-owned

vessel or a vessel compulsorily requisitioned for public purposes by a

Sovereign state." An exception is however created where a vessel owned

70 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

5/20

by a foreign state is engaged in ordinary trading, no immunity will be

granted to her."

Maritime lien is based on the concept that the ship (res) has itself caused

harm, loss or damage to others or their property and must itself make

good that loss or damage. The ship is deemed to be the wrongdoer and

not its owners and is liable to the party who suffers as a result of such

wrongdoing. Thus upon the happening of the wrongful act, a maritime lien

arises in favour of the party concerned and attached as a right in and

against the property of the ship concerned. It is therefore a right which

detracts from the absolute title of the owner of the res.

Its evolution (history) is traced back to the development of common

customs and practices of the Admirals in England and France in 14th

century, we are informed. 19 In France, these customs and practices were

later codified and recognised the rights of seamen to their wages, and

salvors of ships or cargo to reward which were accorded preferential

treatment over other claims before the Admiralty court as rights

enforceable against the vessels concerned. 20 Such claims became the

basis of the rights or interest referred to in modern maritime law of most

nations, as maritime lien.

J udicial decisions and writings of learned authors have traced the origin of

maritime lien and simultaneously exposing its important features. The

origin of maritime lien, as perceived under English law originated in 1851

following the decision in The Bold Buccleugh"'. The court here,

emphasised that maritime lien is a right which 'travels' with the ship into

whosoever possession it may subsequently go. Thus, it does not depend

on possession nor upon notice through filing at a registry as .n the case of

a mortgage. Emphasizing on this, a writer says:

"A maritime lien attaches to the vessel and gains priority without any

court action, deed or other written evidence or any registration, i.e. it

71 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

6/20

need not be registered, i.e. obvious reason for this is that a ship's master

or owner who salvage another sinking vessel, for instance, could not

reasonably be expected, mid-ocean or in a foreign port, to hurry to a

registry which possibly could be thousand miles away to register their

lien. Even where the facilities to undertake the registration exists, the

master would most probably have many pressing needs on his hands

ranging from safety at sea, crew problem to safety of cargo etc." 22

It is therefore often referred to as 'secret' lien and said to be indelible until

acted upon by the admiralty court in an action in rem and 'good against

the world' including a good faith purchaser of the vessel acting without

notice of the lien's existence.

From the historical point of view thus and having regard to some

jurisdictional variations, maritime liens usually arise either from contract,

tort or operation of law in respect of the following claims: Seamen's

wages, master's wages and disbursements, salvage, damage caused by a

ship's tortious act e.g. collision, supply of necessaries (now USA only) and

repairer's lien (USA only). From available sources, the following represents

the salient features of maritime lien as they are consequences associated

with same:

1. The lien arises upon the occurrence of the event creating it, i.e.

collision or wages becoming payable.

2. Once created, the lien is enforceable even if the ship is sold and

whether or not the purchaser has notice of it;

3. The lien is enforceable through an action in rem and as part of this,

(a) the ship, cargo or freight subject to it is liable to arrest prior to a

hearing on the merit; (b) J urisdiction on the merit is founded on the

service of a writ in rem and arrest;

4. In respect of the ship, cargo or freight, the target for the action, the

lien is enforceable against other creditors, (secured or unsecured)

and subject to existing possessory lien, taken priority over all other

721 P age

7/30/2019 lein

7/20

creditors whether the claims of those creditors arose before or after

the creation of the lien.

5. Properly arrested as part of an action in rem in the court enforcing

the lien may be subject to judicial sale and the proceeds are

available to a lien holder and other claimants in rem;

6. J udicial sale as a step in enforcement of the lien extinguishes it and

transfers the lien to the proceeds;

7. The lien is extinguished by the destruction of the ship, cargo or

freight to which it attaches;

8. The lien may be extinguished by larches, waiver or satisfaction of

the debt and, possibly by lodging of bail, or the provision of a

guarantee. 23

3.0 MARITIME MORTGAGES

This has been defined as the creation of a charge or encumbrance in

favour of the lender by the person wishing to borrow. 24 Thus, a ship owner

(mortgagor) who wishes to obtain money because of under-capitalisation

may do so by transferring his interest or property in the vessel to the

lender (mortgagee) as security for the loan. The mortgagor or owner is

free to continue operating and trading the vessel as a profit-making

possession provided he does not act in such a manner as to jeopardise or

put at risk the ship as security for the mortgage and thereby prejudicing

the mortgagee's position. The mortgagee does not take actual possession

because the whole idea behind the transaction is that the vessel shall be

redeemed and the constructive transfer to the mortgage is called off on

repayment of the amount due by the mortgagor.

But under the common law, the old practice was that the mortgage

absolutely conveyed the vessel to the mortgagee and on repayment by

mortgage will reconvey the vessel to the mortgage. This method was

discontinued since 1825 and substituted in most common law countries

73 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

8/20

by the introduction of special forms of mortgage by statute (i.e. statutory

mortgage) 25

The essential feature of a mortgage is that it is only a security transaction

and upon satisfaction of the loan which is secured by the property is

redeemed. But where it is not redeemed by a time limit provided, the

property becomes realisable by the mortgage. The ship owner

(mortgagor) remains in actual possession, and continues to use the vessel

provided nothing detrimental to the mortgagee's interest is done.

An equitable mortgage may also be effected by the deposit of the deed of

legal mortgage in respect of an existing loan with another person in

consideration of another loan. This is possible because as earlier

maintained; actual possession of the vessel is still in the mortgagor. It

may also be created by means of an agreement to enter into a legal

mortgage in consideration of a loan. Also, where a vessel is under

construction, a deposit of the builder's certificate in respect thereto may

constitute an equitable mortgage of the vessel. The effect of an equitable

mortgage is to confer on the equitable mortgagee a preferential right over

the thing charged. It is however subject to the overriding interest of

existing legal mortgages and maritime lien holders.

It is essential to emphasise that while lien does not vest title in the vessel

on the lienee, the mortgage does vest title on the mortgagee as the most

distinguishing feature between lien and mortgage. Also, the lienee does'

not necessarily have the power of sale of the vessel (i.e. without due

process of law leading to a judicial sale etc.), the mortgagee has in the

event of default. 27 Further, most ship registries acknowledge sand

register mortgage transactions and thus giving notice, thereof, liens are

not registrable.

3.1 Registration

741 P age

7/30/2019 lein

9/20

A legal mortgage of a ship is normally done in writing and is registered or

recorded in the ship'!) register at the Port of registry of the vessel in most

jurisdictions. 21 There is no legal obligation to register, but it is usually

done to give proper legal effect to the mortgage. Any mortgagee who

does not register Is not entitled to the benefits under the Act especially in

terms of priorities to be discussed in the later part of this paper, failure to

register it must however be emphasised does not under the mortgage

void. It is also obvious that if a ship is not registered, no registration of

mortgage can be effected on it. Registration is deemed to be notice to the

public of the transaction since the ship's register is a public document

which is available for inspection by interested parties. The most important

advantage of registration is obtaining priority against later secured

creditors of the mortgagor against all non-registered mortgages. It gives

precedence to later registered encumbrances as the ranking in terms of

priority is governed solely by the date of registration of the mortgage.

3.2 Priorities

Registration gives a mortgagee priority over:

(a) Earlier unregistered mortgages, whether or not the mortgagee has

knowledge of them;

(b) Later registered or unregistered mortgages;

(c) Unregistered debentures of earlier creation, even though the

mortgagee knew of them;

(d) Additional advances subsequently made under a prior registered

mortgage where under the agreement was that the mortgage

should cover present and future advances by the mortgagee (this

arises only under common law and not statute).

A mortgagee of a registered mortgage does not however have

priority over:

(a) Mortgages registered earlier;

(b) Maritime liens, whether earlier or later, 29

75 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

10/20

(c) Any claims in connection with which the vessel had already been

arrested at the time when the mortgage was entered into; and

(d) Any mortgages entered into under certificate of mortgage where

notice of the certificate of mortgage appeared on the register at the

time when the mortgagee entered into his mortgage. 30

L C. Ilogu however inform us that the issue of priorities only arises where a

'res' has or is to be sold by the order of a court of competent jurisdiction

or other authorised body in order to satisfy the monetary claim of a holder

of a proprietary right enforceable against the res where the ship owner

fails to appear to defend the sanction and put up security. We are

informed further that the mere fact of commencing action in rem or

obtaining judgement thereon does not enhance the claimant's ranking in

priority. The claimant's interest must be positioned as appropriate in the

given jurisdiction among other competing riqhts." Further, an examination

of some national laws or rules of procedure and the provisions of the

various conventions on maritime liens and mortgages seem to suggest

the following order of ranking of proprietary rights in ships, says t.C, Ilogu:

1. Statutory, court and other charges and costs;

2. Cost of arrest sand sale of the res;

3. Maritime liens which rank inter se from salvage, damage, seamen

and masters' wages to repairers (USA), necessaries (USA);

4. Possessory liens, necessaries;

5. Registered mortgages, and charges;

6. Statutory rights in rem which include cargo and charter party

claimants, repairers, tonnage, pilotage etc;

7. State liens or mortgagees (USA only) and

8. Other trade creditors. 32

It is submitted that in view of the differences in laws of countries and

jurisdictions, this order of priority enumerated by L.c. Ilogu is indeed a

better and more acceptable basis of determining priorities for the

76 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

11/20

purposes of sharing the proceeds of sale of the res. It appear: to be the

most prevalent order of priority amongst nation states.

4. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS ON MARITIME LIENS AND

MORTGAGES

From our examination of the issue of priorities, and the foregoing

discussion so far, it is obvious that the recognition of the principles and

rules relating to maritime liens and mortgages is no uniform and duties

among the countries of the world. Only very few principles and rules are

uniformly recognised. But the situation is still not helpful because of the

problem of enforcement resulting from jurisdiction differences and

problem. The aim of the various international conventions on maritime

liens and mortgages and other maritime claims, namely the 1926, 1967

and 1993, was to secure uniform framework for the recognition and

enforcements of these proprietary interest. The reasons responsible for

the little success is not farfetched. The primary reason is attributed to the

lack of consensus on the confect of laws principles governing the creation

and operation of maritime liens. Also, the difficulty in accepting the

priority of maritime liens over mortgages in some jurisdictions has been

attributed to the conflict between the operating interests, (i.e. ship

owners, salvors, crew) and the financial interests (lenders). The resultant

effect of all these is that many nations are yet to implement any of these

conventions and therefore subjecting the proprietary rights to divergent

enforcement regimes.

The 1926 convention for example recognises certain categories of

maritime liens and its priority over mortgages. The liens are also

extinguished after one year with a few registration in accordance with the

law of a contracting state in which the vessel is registered. We are

however informed by our sources that as at 1995, only 28 states had

ratified the convention, 69 years after."

77 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

12/20

The 1967 International Convention for the unification of certain rules

relating to maritime liens and mortgages retains substantial provisions of

the 1926 convention except for the removal of master's disbursements

from the recognised categories of maritime lien. The convention further

requires the deregistration of ships should be with the consent of the

registered mortgagees. Also, as at 1995, we are informed, only 4 states

had ratified it although some state laws which have not ratified it is said

to conform with its provisions, e.g. Germany. 34

The International convention on maritime liens and mortgages 1993 was

carried out under the auspices of the International Maritime Organisation

(IMO) unlike the previous ones which were initiated by the United Nations.

It is substantially similar to the earlier conventions and recognises the

categories of maritime liens as in the previous conventions, but it has

excluded from the list of maritime lien claims wreck removals, general

average contributions and damage arising from the carriage of oil and

other hazardous substances where compensation is payable under

another convention or statutory provision. With regards to mortgages, the

convention contains similar provisions on earlier ones which relates to

recognition, enforcement and priority of interests registered in accordance

with the law of the stage of the vessel's registration. This convention

provides for registered mortgages to be extinguished by judicial or forced

sale of the vessel except where the sale takes place in the state or

registry and there is consent as between the parties that the mortgage

should continue.

The provisions of these conventions may differ from those obtained under

national laws which are often at variance with the convention. Also, the

conventions have not been ratified by most nations especially the

powerful maritime nations such as J apan, United States and the United

Kingdom have not ratified the earlier conventions. This has increased the

conflict of laws principles and rules governing the creation and operation

of these proprietary rights.

78 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

13/20

Thus, the positive effects of the provisions of these conventions have not

been appreciated in view of the fact that conflicting national laws is

applied more often in resolving conflicts arising from the creation and

operation of these proprietary interests or rights to the detriment of the

holders of such rights or interests.

4.1 Nigeria

Although Nigeria is yet to ratify and for implement any of these

conventions earlier mentioned, most provisions of its national laws

relating to maritime liens and mortgages substantially conforms with the

provisions of these conventions. S. 5(3) of the Nigerian Admiralty Act,

1991 defines maritime liens and recognises the following categories of

maritime liens:

(a) salvage; or

(b) damage done by ship; or

(c) wages of the master or a member of the crew of a ship; or

(d) master's disbursements.

The Nigerian Merchant Shipping Act, 1990 provides in S. 374(1) a two

years limitation period for pursuing such claims. As for mortgages, the

Nigerian Admiralty J urisdiction Act, 1991 defines mortgage in 8.26(1) to

include "a hypothecation, or pledge of and a charge on the ship or share"

while the Merchant shipping act, 1990 provides the requirements for

mortgaging Nigerian vessels, registration and priority of such mortgages

etc which are substantially the same as the provisions of the International

Conventions earlier examined.

From an examination of the national laws of some countries especially the

common and civil law jurisdictions, even though they have not ratified the

various conventions some of their laws conform substantially with the

79 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

14/20

7/30/2019 lein

15/20

5.2 Choice of Law

After resolving the issue of jurisdiction and it is determined that a court is

conferred with jurisdiction, the next issue for determination is what lawwill apply? Many rules on determining choice of law have been evolved,

but the significant ones in relation to maritime claims are:

1. Lex Fori, which means the domestic or national law of the forum; and

2. Lex causae, which means the law which governs the question or

transaction and which may further be reduced into the law of

domicile (Lex domicili) or law of place of contract (Lex contractus).

It is a generally recognised principle of International law that the

substantive rights of the parties to an action may be determined by

foreign law (Lex causae) while matters of procedure are determined by

the lex fori (local law). The problem that often arise is the difficulty of

determining what is a substantive issues and a procedural one. 37

The Nigerian approach appears to be lex fori and therefore procedural.

This is derived from decisions such as Pavlos Chiladakis v. Owners of MN

Rinio. 38 Thus, this absence of uniform international means in resolving

choice of law problem tend to encourage forum shopping by claimants on

the one hand and on the other hand causes inequity or injustice in certain

jurisdiction.

5.3 Recognition of Foreign Judgements

As a general rule the judgement of the court of a foreign country has no

direct application in another country unless enforced or recognised. 33 The

procedure for the enrolment or registration of foreign judgements are

mainly issues of lex fori and vary from jurisdictions, the common factors

for consideration been that it is a final judgment and that the due process

of law has been complied with.

81 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

16/20

5.4 Procedures and Types of Action

In most common law and some civil law jurisdictions, 2 types of legal

action are maintainable, namely; an action against the vessel itself known

as an 'action in rem' and/or action against the owner known as 'action in

personam'.

There are conflicting schools of thought as to whether an action in rem is

procedural or substantive in nature. It is regarded as procedural in the

United Kingdom and here it is predicated on the commencement of legal

action and the arrest of seizure of the vessel. The substantive thought is

prevalent in U.S.A. and Canada and it is based on the legal principle that

the right of actions is enforceable against the "res" or person of the

vessel. The debate is not our concern, but judicial decisions do shed some

light on the controversy. Hence, where procedural approach is adopted,

the conflict of laws is resolved by lex tori." In practice, it is usual to

commence an action 'in rem' against the res in a jurisdiction where the

vessel can be located since any order or judgement of the applicable court

is to be directed at the res itself. On the other hand, an action 'in,

personam' being directed at the person of the owner, charter or operator

of the vessel should be commenced where he can be found, either

personally or in relation to his business.

While in most common law jurisdictions, writs 'in rem' and 'in personam'

can be served through master of the vessel to enforce maritime liens and

mortgages, in civil law countries, 'in rem' actions are unknown and in

some of these countries e.g. France and Belgium, enforcement of

maritime claims are done by applying the 'Saisae Conservatioire' or

conservatory attachment which prevent -the defendant's assets from

being removed from jurisdiction or dissipated. This approach is likened to

orders for arrest, attachment, detention or even mareva injunction which

821 P age

7/30/2019 lein

17/20

can only be sought in common law countries after issuance of a writ in

rem or in personam, the most commonest being the Arrest Order which

serves as a form of interim relief or provisional remedy; a ground of

jurisdiction over the matter and as a way of obtaining 'security' for the

claim. In the U.S.A., there is an additional process similar to arrest

procedure in Nigeria and U.K. called 'Action in Personam with Attachment'.

The procedure for judicial sale of vessels may vary from jurisdiction to

another, but the end result is often that all rights in rem are extinguished.

40 A sale by a competent court of authority confers good title to the new

owner of the vessel free from all encumbrances and will be so recognised

in other jurisdlctlons." In support of this assertion. Brown D. J . in The

Trento 42 said:

II the doctrine that the sale of a vessel by a court of

competent jurisdiction discharges her from liens of every

description is the law of the civilised world:

6.0 OBSERVATIONS. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

The foregoing analysis obviously present numerous legal problems which

requires attention and solutions internationally at first and then within

individual country's jurisdiction. In the first place, there is the difficulty in

defining the scope and maritime liens uniformly among nation states. The

end result as earlier noticed is the inequity and injustice resulting from the

non-recognition of some in certain jurisdictions. Some writers have put

forward suggestions on the need to introduce a system of registration of

Maritime liens as done in the case of mortgages within a limited period of

its accrual. While we concede to this suggestion, we shall be quick to point

out that such is only practicable written the scope of maritime liens is

uniformly recognised by nation states, otherwise the major problem of

non-recognition will still constitute a barrier. Another problem likely to

pose with registration of maritime lien is the difficulty earlier noted by

83 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

18/20

J ustice R. D. Muhammed when he said ".. it need not be gist fired. the

obvious reason is that a ship's master or owner who salvage another

sinking vessel, for instance could not reasonably by expected, mid-ocean

or in a foreign pert to hurry to a Registry which possibly could be

thousand miles away to register their lien. Even where the facilities to

undertake the registration exists, the master would most probably have

many pressing needs 0:1 his hands ranging from safety at sea, crew

problem to safety of cargo etc

There is the compelling need for the International Community to ratify the

various conventions for the unification of the conception and enforcement

principles on maritime liens and mortgages. Thus there is the need for

adoption and integration of the International Conventions into the national

laws for uniformity of rules and principles, the compelling need for this

cannot be emphasised bearing in mind the importance of the maritime

industry in the development of International trade and relations between

nation states especially with the increasing level of International trade and

transportation by sea and use of ships.

ENDNOTES

*Sam M. Adam (LLM)

Dept. of Property & Commercial Law Faculty of Law

University of jos

1. Christopher Hill, Maritime Law (Great Britain: The Pitman Press,

1981) p. 23

2. i.c. Ilogu. Modus International Law & Business Quarterly, Vol. 2 No.

2, J une 1997, p. 35

3. Ibid

4. The 1926, 1967 and 1993 International Conventions on Maritime

Liens & Mortgages

841 P age

7/30/2019 lein

19/20

5. justice R. D. Muhammed, jCA, Commenting on Maritime Liens and

Mortgages: International Perspective, Abuja, 1997, p. 1 and citing

Alfred H. Sivertown: The Law of Lien (1988)

6. Ibid

7. L. C. Ilogu, op cit, p. 35

8 See generally "Enforcement of maritime Claims" by D.C. jackson,

2nd ed. as cited by t.C, Ilogu, op cit, p. 36

9. See The Ally (1952)2 Lloyd's Rep. 427; The Scio (1867) 1A & E353

10. (1977)1 lloyd's Rep. p. 256

11. (1986)2 lloyd's Rep. p. 347

12. See S. 91 Maritime Lien Act (46 US Code)

13. S. 5 (4) of the Act

14. See The Monicas (1967)2 lloyd's Rep. 113

15. See The Ugland Trailer (1985)2 lloyd's Rep. 372 and The Annangel

Glory (1988)1 loyd's Rep. 4'j

16 Fhe Rippon City (1897) p. 226

17. Vascongada v. Cristina (1938) AC 485 or (1938)1 Alier 719

18 See S. 10(2) The State Immunity Act, 1978 of U.K. and The

Philippine Admiral (1976) 1 Alier 78

19. L. C. Ilogu, op cit, p. 37.

20. William Tetley, Maritime liens & Claims, 1st ed; Chapter 1, p.38-41

and cited in t.C, Ilogu, op cit, p. 37

21. (1851)13 ER at 890

22. justice R. D. Muhammed, jCA, op cit, p.2

23. L. C. Ilogu, op. cit, p. 38

24. Christopher Hill, op, cit, p. 23

25. See S. 323 (i) Nigerian Merchant Shipping act, 7990 and U.K.

Merchant Shipping Act, 1988 which amended the 1894 Act

26. See King v. King (1735) 3P WMS 358

27. See S. 326(2) Nigerian Merchant Shipping act, 1990

28. See S. 323 (2) Nigerian Merchant Shipping Act, 1990; S 31 ID U.K.

Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (As amended by the 1988 Act)

85 I P age

7/30/2019 lein

20/20

29 See The Loannis Daskaleiis (1974) 1 lloyd's Rep. 174: The

Pickanranny (1960)1 teyfs Rep. 533 and TheColorado (1923) 14

lloyd's Rep. 251

30. A Certificate of Mortgage is made to cover circumstances where the

ship owner desires to mortgage it outside the country in which the

ship's port of registry is located. The ship owner then applies to the

registrar at the port of registry to issue a certificate of mortgage.

See S. 42 of the U.K. Merchant Shipping act, 1894

31. t.C, Ilogu, op cit p.46

32. Ibid

33. Ibid. p. 40

34. Ibid

35. See The Eleftheria 11969)2 ALLER 641; The Nordwind (1987)3 NSCI;

The Atlantic Star (1974); The Abidin Daver (1984) AC 398

36. See The Loannis Daskelelis (1974) 1 lloyd's Rep 174; The Halcyon

Isle (1980)2 lloyd's Rep 325; The Scotia 35 F907 (SD. NY 1880)

37. (1986)2 NSC638

38. See Dicey and Morris "The Conflict of Laws" 11th ed; cap 14 p. 418

as cited in t.C, Ilogu, op. cit, p.44

39. See Phrantzes v. Argenti (1960)2 QS 19 at 35

40. See The Edith (1976) 74 US 518

41. Per Lushington in the Tremont 166 ER534 at 534

42. (1888) 4F 657 at 662 E.D. Mien.

86 I P age