| Case ID |
2af2a1c9-9eec-4b2a-a9f2-b5209ca9ea44 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Petition No.144-K of 1994 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 19, 1994 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner seeking leave to appeal against the dismissal of an admiralty suit concerning the vessel 'Lakatoi Express'. The court held that the petitioner failed to establish that the vessel was beneficially owned by the person liable for the claim at the time the cause of action arose. The judgment highlighted the importance of the term 'beneficially owned as respects majority shares' in determining jurisdiction under the Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance. The court concluded that a time charterer does not qualify as a beneficial owner, thereby affirming the lower court's decision. |
| Summary |
In the case of Civil Petition No.144-K of 1994, the Supreme Court of Pakistan examined the application of the Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance, specifically focusing on the conditions under which a vessel can be arrested. The case involved a dispute over the arrest of the vessel 'Lakatoi Express', which was time chartered to a company that did not hold beneficial ownership of the majority shares. The court emphasized that for jurisdiction to be invoked, the claimant must demonstrate that the defendant was the beneficial owner of the majority shares at the time the cause of action arose. This decision underscored the legal interpretation of beneficial ownership in maritime law and clarified the limitations on actions in rem against sister ships. The ruling is significant for practitioners in maritime law, as it delineates the boundaries of jurisdiction in admiralty cases. Key terms include 'admiralty jurisdiction', 'beneficial ownership', 'time charter', and 'sister ship'. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
AJMAL MIAN,
SALEEM AKHTAR
|
| Lawyers |
Munawar Ghani,
KA Wahab
|
| Petitioners |
Messrs V.N AKHANI & COMPANY
|
| Respondents |
2 others,
m.v. LAKATOI EXPRESS
|
| Citations |
1994 SLD 217,
1994 PLD 894
|
| Other Citations |
I Congreso del Partido (1981) 1 All ELR 1092,
St Merriel's case (1963) 1 Lloyd's Report 63,
The Andrea Ursula Medway Drydock & Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Beneficial Owners of Ship 'Andrea Ursula' (1971) 1 All ELR 821,
Messrs Sun Line Agencies Ltd. v. Vessel m.v. 'PSILORITIS' and 2 others 1984 CLC 1553,
Messrs Arshad Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. v. The Ship Maersk Astro and 2 others PLD 1988 Kar. 515
|
| Laws Involved |
Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance
|
| Sections |
4,
4(4)
|