"When the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act No. 59 of 1991 was enacted, cognizance was taken in Section 1(1)(b) that prior to the commencement of the Act, the exercise of admiralty jurisdiction was not limited to the Federal High Court. The exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court on admiralty matters was vested by Section 19 of the Act which provides:
"19 Notwithstanding the provisions of any other enactment or law, the Court shall, as from the commencement of this Act, exercise exclusive jurisdiction in admiralty causes or matters, whether civil or criminal."
Upon the coming into effect of the 1999 Constitution, the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court became crystallized. The jurisdiction in admiralty matters was spelt out under Section 251(1) (g) which provides:"251(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Constitution and in addition to such other jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly, the Federal High Court shall have and exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other Court in civil causes and matters(g) any admiralty jurisdiction, including, shipping and navigation on the River Niger or River Benue and other affluent and on such other inland waterway as may be designated by any enactment to be on international waterway, all Federal ports (including the Constitution and powers of the ports authorities for Federal ports) and carriage by sea.
" Since the enactment of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), there has been a radical curtailment of the unlimited jurisdiction hitherto enjoyed by the State High Courts when it comes to adjudication of causes and matters between parties. Before the establishment of the Federal High Court in 1973, the High Court of the States exercised unlimited jurisdiction in respect of matters contained in both the Exclusive and Concurrent Legislative Lists by virtue of the Regional Courts (Federal Jurisdiction) Act Cap 177 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1958 and the Admiralty Jurisdiction no. 34 of 1962 as can be seen in Section 236(1) of the 1979 Constitution (as amended) which provided as follows:"
236(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution and in addition to such other jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by law the High Court of a State shall have unlimited jurisdiction to hear and determine any civil proceedings in which the existence or extent of a legal right, power, duty, Liability, privilege, interest, obligation or claim is in issue or to hear and determine any criminal proceedings involving or relating to any penalty, forfeiture, punishment or other liability in respect of an offence committed by any person."
In contrast to the unlimited jurisdiction donated by the 1979 Constitution which was later amended by Section 230(1)(d) of the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree No. 107 of 1993, that jurisdiction has been further whittled down in the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which stipulates in Section 272(1) &(3) thus:"272(1) Subject to the provision of Section 251 and any other provisions of this Constitution the High Court of a State shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any civil proceedings in which the existence or extent of a legal right, power, duty, liability, privilege, interest, obligation or claim is in issue or to hear and determine any criminal proceedings involving or relating to any penalty, forfeiture, punishment or other liability in respect of an offence committed by any person. (2) ........ (3) Subject to the provision of Section 251 and other provisions of this Constitution the Federal High Court shell have jurisdiction to here and determine the question as to whether the term of office of a member of the House of Assembly of a State, a Governor or Deputy Governor has ceased or become vacant."
Per AKA'AHS, J.S.C. IN TSKJ (NIG) LTD v. OTOCHEM (NIG) LTD CITATION: (2018) LPELR-44294(SC)
