The claimants filed a claim against the motor vessel Chun Cheng 212 for unpaid wages and damages for injuries sustained on board the vessel. The vessel was arrested by the High Court. The defendant shipowner applied for the following orders:
Defendant argued that the claim is for unpaid wages earned while employed aboard the vessel Yu Tuna 212 (IMU NO 8821319 flying the flag of Seychelles). None of the claimants has been employed by the defendant or was a contracted officer or member of the crew on the Chun Cheng 212. There is no nexus between the Chung Chen 212 and Yu Tuna 212 to infer culpability against the defendant or that can entitle the claimants to justify an in rem claim over the Chung Chen 212 on the basis of a maritime lien. The court therefore did not have jurisdiction as the requirements of the Arrest Convention 1999 had not been met.
Held: Applications 1, 2 and 4 are dismissed with costs.
Defendant’s reliance on the Arrest Convention 1999 is rejected because it failed to show that Kenya is one of the State Parties bound by it. There are only 10 States who have acceded to that Convention and Kenya is not one of them.
The claimants' claim is based on a maritime lien and a statutory lien because claims for wages and personal injury give rise to maritime liens. This is stated in arts 1.1.b and 1.1.m of the Arrest Convention 1952 which guide both the UK and Kenya. Further, in Kenya’s domestic law, the Merchant Shipping Act, s 105 creates a maritime lien over a vessel for crew’s wages.