Farocean Marine (Pty) Ltd v Malacca Holdings Limited and Another

Farocean Marine (Pty) Ltd, a Cape Town shipbuilder, carried out refurbishment work on the motor yacht Summit One pursuant to an interim agreement of 26 March 2001 concluded with Earl Romans. The yacht was owned by Malacca Holdings Limited, a Cayman Islands company, whose sole shareholder was Romans. Both respondents were peregrini. Farocean alleged uncertainty as to whether Romans contracted in his personal capacity or as agent for Malacca. After disputes over unpaid invoices, Farocean sought and obtained an ex parte order attaching the vessel to found or confirm the jurisdiction of the Cape High Court and joining both Malacca and Romans as alternative defendants under section 5(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act 105 of 1983. The High Court discharged the rule nisi, finding the attachment unjustified. Farocean appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order attaching the motor yacht Summit One and associated equipment to confirm the court’s jurisdiction in an action against Malacca Holdings Limited, and joining Earl Romans as an alternative defendant in terms of section 5(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act 105 of 1983.

The case clarifies the nature of the prima facie case required for attachment to found or confirm jurisdiction in admiralty matters, particularly where there is uncertainty as to whether a contracting party acted as principal or agent. It authoritatively confirms that section 5(1) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act permits the joinder of alternative defendants not otherwise amenable to jurisdiction, highlighting the breadth of the court’s admiralty powers and promoting the resolution of all related disputes in a single forum.