Portrait supplied by the author
The Story Behind First Kings Investment Ltd. v. Jahlive Sadakka (Nig.) Ltd. [2025] SC
A businessman in Nigeria ordered 75 cartons of electric car jacks from China. Like thousands of international transactions every day, the goods travelled across oceans under a Bill of Lading the document that governs carriage by sea.
Everything seemed ordinary.
The ship arrived in Nigeria.
The container reached the port.
But that was where the real dispute began.
The company responsible for clearing the container could not do its job in time. Days turned into weeks. Weeks became months. Demurrage kept accumulating. Eventually, another logistics company Jahlive Sadakka (Nig.) Ltd. was appointed to clear the goods, move them into a warehouse, and handle delivery.
Instead of receiving its cargo, First Kings Investment Ltd. received something else.
A debit note demanding over ₦1.3 million in local charges and demurrage.
The importer refused to accept the situation.
It insisted that its goods were being unlawfully detained. It approached the Federal High Court, asking the court to declare the detention illegal, compel the release of the cargo, and award millions of naira in damages for detinue and bailment.
At first glance, the case appeared to be an admiralty dispute.
After all, the goods had travelled by sea.
But appearances can be deceptive.
The Federal High Court dismissed the suit, holding that the wrong party had been sued because the respondent was not a party to the Bill of Lading.
The importer appealed.
The Court of Appeal looked beyond the identity of the parties and asked a more fundamental question:
Was this even an admiralty case?
That single question changed everything.
The Court of Appeal concluded that once the cargo had been discharged from the ship, cleared through Customs, moved into a warehouse, and handed over to the appointed consolidator, the contract of carriage by sea had effectively come to an end.
What remained was no longer a maritime dispute.
It had become an ordinary dispute involving detention of goods, bailment, and tort.
Such matters fall outside the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
Still convinced that the matter remained an admiralty claim until the cargo reached the consignee, First Kings Investment Ltd. took the fight to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
The Supreme Court carefully examined section 1(2) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act.
The appellant focused on the words:
"…until the goods are delivered to the consignee…"
But the Court pointed out the words that followed:
"…or whoever is to receive them."
Those few additional words made all the difference.
The evidence showed that the shipping company had appointed a local consolidator to receive the cargo in Nigeria.
Once the cargo reached that appointed receiver, the voyage contemplated by the Bill of Lading had legally ended.
From that moment onward, any dispute about warehousing, detention, demurrage, or failure to release the goods no longer belonged to admiralty law.
It became an ordinary civil dispute.
The Supreme Court therefore dismissed the appeal.
More importantly, the Court reaffirmed an important principle of Nigerian maritime law:
Admiralty jurisdiction does not continue indefinitely simply because goods were once carried by sea. Once the contractual carriage ends and the goods have been delivered to the consignee or the person appointed to receive them, subsequent disputes fall outside the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
The Court also reminded litigants that jurisdiction is everything.
A beautifully argued case, supported by convincing evidence, cannot survive if it is filed before a court without jurisdiction.
A trial conducted without jurisdiction, no matter how thorough, is a nullity.
Key Lessons from the Decision
A Bill of Lading is the foundation of a contract of carriage by sea.
Admiralty jurisdiction is limited and does not cover every dispute connected with imported goods.
Once cargo is delivered to the consignee or an authorised receiver, carriage by sea ends.
Claims based on detinue, bailment, or ordinary tort after delivery are generally outside the Federal High Court's admiralty jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is the first question every lawyer should ask before commencing an action.
Written by Umar Sanusi Garba Kalambaina, a law student at Northwest University, Sokoto, legal writer, legal researcher, and Founder/CEO of LegalTech Innovators Ltd., with a passion for legal innovation, research, and expanding access to justice through technology.
Talk2umarsgk@gmail.com / 0808 115 3649
Author’s views are published for discussion and do not necessarily represent the views of Innovative Bar. Readers should consult the primary legal materials and obtain professional advice where appropriate.
About the Author
