Experienced ship financiers and their advisors will be familiar with Namibia as a jurisdiction that offers a strategic geographic location, efficient court system and favourable ranking regime for mortgagee claims after the judicial sale of a vessel.

The scope of Namibia’s admiralty jurisdiction was highlighted again in a High Court judgement delivered on 15 July 2025 in which we acted for the successful ship financiers.

In earlier proceedings, the court had ordered the arrest and subsequent judicial sale of the vessel pendente lite (before final judgement) by way of a public auction. An interested party, alleging to be the de facto owner of the vessel and unrelated to the borrower, who was funded by the plaintiffs, then intervened to challenge the vessel’s ownership and the court’s jurisdiction to determine matters in dispute.

In this latest judgement, the Court held that it did have jurisdiction to hear and decide on issues of title and ownership of the vessel, as well as the proceeds of the judicial sale of that vessel.

In doing so, the Court emphasised that, as a Namibian court, its jurisdiction is a wide jurisdiction conferred on the High Court by section 4 of the English Admiralty Court Act of 1840. This is on the basis that the vessel was arrested off the coast of Walvis Bay, Namibia, as well as the fact that the vessel was judicially sold and the proceeds of the sale were paid into the Namibia High Court which is consistent with the principles of English admiralty law.

The Court held further that Namibian law should apply with respect to jurisdiction relating to mortgage foreclosure claims, but that in determining the validity of the mortgage, the law of the place of registration of the mortgage should be considered.

The Court also held that the interested party had failed to prove that it was the legal or factual owner of the vessel; the mortgage was validly registered in accordance with the laws of the Marshall Islands; and that the plaintiffs had conducted bona fide and reasonable due diligence and were not parties to the fraud alleged by the interested party.

In addition, the Court issued an order directing that if the judgement is appealed by the interested party, the interested party is obliged to put up security for legal costs in addition to the security already provided for in terms of the Supreme Court Rules and Practice, given that it is a foreign peregrinus of the Court.

While we wait to hear if the judgement will be appealed, given the automatic right of appeal in respect of final judgements in Namibia, this latest development represents another important step forward for Namibia’s admiralty jurisdiction.

Written by Lana Stockton, Partner, Bowmans Namibia