In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has dismissed an admiralty suit filed by Tamil Nadu fishermen against the owners of the vessel M.V. Korea Chemi, emphasizing the territorial limitations of admiralty jurisdiction under the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017. The court's decision underscores the necessity for vessels to be physically present within a High Court's territorial waters to invoke its admiralty jurisdiction.
The case arose from a collision on October 19, 2023, approximately 48 nautical miles off the Kerala coast, between the fishing boat Mercy Annai and the M.V. Korea Chemi. The fishermen alleged that the collision resulted from the vessel's negligence, leading to injuries and loss of livelihood. Subsequently, they sought damages amounting to ₹1 crore and requested the arrest and sale of the vessel to secure their claim.
Despite the incident occurring within the Kerala High Court's territorial jurisdiction, the M.V. Korea Chemi was anchored at Nhava Sheva Port in Mumbai at the time the suit was filed. The vessel's owners contended that the Kerala High Court lacked jurisdiction, as the Admiralty Act, 2017, restricts jurisdiction to vessels within the territorial waters of the respective High Court's coastal limits. They filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code to reject the plaint on these grounds.
Justice Syam Kumar V.M., while allowing the application, highlighted that the Admiralty Act, 2017, specifically limits the jurisdiction of High Courts to vessels located within their territorial waters, defined as 12 nautical miles from the baseline. The court noted that the Act had effectively modified previous jurisprudence, such as the M.V. Elisabeth case, which had allowed broader jurisdictional reach. The judge observed that for effective enforcement of admiralty jurisdiction, it is imperative that the vessel be physically present within the High Court's territorial limits at the time of filing the suit.
The court's ruling clarifies that the Admiralty Act, 2017, does not permit High Courts to exercise jurisdiction over foreign vessels that are not within their territorial waters, even if the maritime incident occurred within the High Court's jurisdiction. This decision aligns with the Act's intent to streamline and define the scope of admiralty jurisdiction, ensuring that legal proceedings are conducted within the territorial confines of the respective High Courts.
The dismissal of the suit underscores the importance of adhering to the territorial limitations set forth in the Admiralty Act, 2017. It serves as a precedent for future cases, reinforcing the principle that admiralty jurisdiction is confined to vessels physically present within a High Court's territorial waters at the time of filing. This ruling contributes to the evolving landscape of maritime law in India, emphasizing the need for clarity and consistency in the application of admiralty jurisdiction.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.