The unique focus of the Admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court of England & Wales is with maritime disputes concerning such specialised legal subjects as collisions, salvage, towage, pilotage, ownership and security interests in ships, and crew wages. Unlike most of the High Court’s jurisdiction, the Admiralty jurisdiction can be exercised in rem, through the arrest and sale of ships and cargoes.

This maritime emphasis creates a natural overlap between the Admiralty and the shipping litigation which has always been prominent in the Commercial Court. This is reflected in the very close connection which exists between the two jurisdictions today. Until relatively recent times, however, the Admiralty operated quite separately from the Commercial Court. There were two historical reasons for this.

The Admiralty Oar

Eleanor of Aquitaine

First, whilst the elements of English shipping law relating to carriage of goods by sea were a product of the national common law, Admiralty law was more international in outlook, reflecting the roving nature of ships. Admiralty principles were largely based on Roman and (European) Civil law, sources, such as the customary Sea Laws of Oleron, which were codified under the authority of Henry II’s Queen, Eleanor of Aquitaine, first in her French domains, then a few years later in England.

Second, Admiralty jurisdiction belonged to the High Court of Admiralty, not to the common law Courts, which did not claim authority over the high seas outside the realm.

The Judicature Acts of the 1870’s abolished the High Court of Admiralty, the common law Courts, and other traditional Courts, including those which administered family law. All of these old Courts were replaced by the new High Court of Justice. The High Court was a single entity, but it was split into a number of Divisions for administrative purposes, and the work of the old Courts was divided up between the Divisions.

Because the law of the old family Courts was, like Admiralty law, based on Roman and Civil principles, Admiralty jurisdiction and family jurisdiction were both transferred to the same Division, the Probate, Divorce & Admiralty. This meant that the Commercial Court, which was part of the Queen’s Bench Division, did not acquire any Admiralty jurisdiction at its creation in 1895. But although the Commercial Court did not hear Admiralty cases, the Admiralty sometimes heard commercial cases, because some (although not all) Admiralty Judges agreed to hear disputes about carriage by sea and marine insurance. John Gorell Barnes, who was the Admiralty Judge in 1895 and later became President of the Probate, Divorce & Admiralty Division, was particularly well known for his willingness to hear commercial cases when the Commercial Court was particularly busy. This made sense, given the close subject-matter connections between the maritime aspects of commercial litigation and the Admiralty jurisdiction. The overlap between the two Courts was further demonstrated by the fact that many barristers and solicitors practised in both. Indeed, most of the Commercial Court’s early Judges had done at least some Admiralty work before going on the Bench. Gorell Barnes had appeared in many commercial cases in the Queen’s Bench, and was a former pupil of J.C. Mathew, the first Commercial Judge and the outstanding commercial lawyer of his time.

Given this natural crossover, it is not surprising that, by the early 1900’s, there were calls for the Admiralty and the Commercial Court to be merged. (In fact, some practitioners had argued before 1895 that the best way to make commercial litigation cheaper and more efficient would be to transfer all commercial work from the Queen’s Bench to the Admiralty.) However, while merger was a natural development, a century passed before it happened. The Commercial Court and the Admiralty remained in separate Divisions until the Administration of Justice Act 1970 transferred the Admiralty jurisdiction to the Queen’s Bench. Even then, the Act provided for the Commercial Court and the Admiralty to co-exist as separate parts of the Queen’s Bench, with the Admiralty to continue to have its own specially-nominated Judge. Mr Justice Brandon, who was the Admiralty Judge at the time of the Act, sat in both Courts after 1970. But his successor, Mr Justice Sheen, appears to have confined himself to the Admiralty throughout his judicial career.

Since the 1990’s, however, the Commercial Court and the Admiralty have worked so closely together that they are, for practical purposes, different aspects of the same Court. Although they formally retain separate identities under the Senior Courts Act 1981, the nominated Admiralty Judge is also a member of the Commercial Court and sits interchangeably in both Courts, while other Commercial Judges sit in Admiralty if the Admiralty Judge is not available. The two Courts also share essentially the same administration, and the Commercial Court Guide and the Admiralty Guide appear as a single publication, with Admiralty practice largely following the Commercial Court.

Sir John Gorell Barnes, with the Admiralty Anchor in the background.

The main practical significance today of the distinction between the two Courts is that claims in rem and actions relating to the traditional Admiralty topics of collision, salvage, towage, pilotage, seaman’s wages and the like must be formally commenced in the name of the Admiralty Court. There is also a special Admiralty section of the Civil Procedure Rules, Part 61, and an associated Practice Direction 61, which contain specific rules about actions in rem, arrest and sale, collision actions, and limitation claims. The Admiralty also has its own emblems: a depiction of an anchor, which hangs in Court when the Admiralty Judge is sitting, and the Admiralty Oar. A silver oar has been used as a symbol of the Court’s authority since Tudor times, although the current Admiralty Oar, which is displayed in the Rolls Building, probably dates from the 17th Century.

 

Mr Justice Teare, the Admiralty Judge until 2020, receiving the Admiralty Oar in front of the Admiralty Anchor.

Management of Admiralty cases is divided between the Judge and the Registrar, who deals with most interlocutory matters and tries the smaller cases. The Admiralty Judge is currently Mr Justice Andrew Baker. The Registrar is Master Richard Davison.

The Judge or Registrar may sit with assessors, who are experienced mariners, at the trial of collision claims or other actions involving issues of navigation or seamanship where expert assistance is appropriate. The Judge and the Registrar are supported by the Admiralty Marshall, who is responsible for arresting ships or cargoes in actions in rem and for organising sales of arrested property.