Kenyan trader takes Sh206 million metal shipment dispute to London court

A Kenyan metal dealer, Safari Jeanvier, has been forced to pursue payment of Sh206,400,000 in the London Courts after a judge declared that Kenyan courts lack jurisdiction to hear the matter.

Jeanvier sold three containers of metal to Kama Metal Limited and shipped them through Maersk Kenya Limited.

Kama Metal Limited, a company incorporated in the UAE was to pay Sh283,800,000 (USD 2.2 million) for the said shipment.

However, Jeanvier said the steel company only paid Sh77,400,000 (USD 600,000).

Jeanvier filed a suit against Kama Metal Limited and Maersk before Justice Paul Rotich who dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

Justice Rotich noted that the contract emanating from bill of lading under which the cargo was shipped had restricted any dispute arising be litigated in a court in London.

The judge noted that Clause 26 of the terms of carriage under the bill of lading, parties expressly stated that any dispute arising under the subject contract shall be determined by the English High Court of

Justice in London to the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the courts of another country.

The judge said the clause ousts the jurisdiction of his court to determine disputes arising from the bill of lading.

“The Court, therefore, agrees with the Maersk Kenya Limited (1st defendant), by filing this suit the plaintiff (Jeanvier) is attempting to disregard the terms of the contract which gives the jurisdiction for determination of any dispute to the English High Court of Justice in London.

The contract indicated that under the bill of lading, the Shipping Company Maersk Kenya Limited can only be sued in London and Newyork or any court of their choice.

The judge said that Jeanvier failed to justify the reason for suing in the Kenyan courts as opposed to the contractually agreed forum, the English High Court of Justice in London.

“The upshot of my findings above is that this Court lacks jurisdiction to determine the matter and down its tools,” said Justice Rotich.

Maersk said that sometimes in September 2025, Jeanviar issued them with shipping instructions for shipment of a consignment from the Port of Mombasa to the Port of Penang in Malaysia.

Maersk Head of Legal of East Africa Fatuma Muiruri said the disputed consignment was loaded in three containers with a bill of lading dated September 2025 which governed the parties.

Muiruri said that clause 26 of the bill of lading under Maersk Kenya Limited, stated that any dispute relating to the bill of lading for shipments to or from the US, shall be governed by US law and the United States Federal Court of the Southern District of New York is to have exclusive jurisdiction to hear all disputes in respect thereof.

She further said that in all other cases, the bill of lading issued shall be governed by and construed in accordance with English law and all disputes arising thereunder shall be determined by the English High Court of Justice in London to the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the courts of another country.

“Alternatively, the bill of lading states that at the carrier's (Maersk Kenya Limited) sole option, it may commence proceedings against the merchant at a competent court of a place of business of the merchant logistic shipping company,” said Muiruri.

She said Kama Metal Limited has filed a claim against Maersk A/S and Maersk Malasyia in the English Court of Justice and London seeking among others, an order compelling the shipping companies deliver the goods upon presentation of the original bill of lading.

However, Jeanvier said that the mere fact that the subject cargo is presently in Malaysia does not oust the jurisdiction of the Kenyan court.

Jeanvier said that the dispute concerns a Kenyan and contractual arrangements negotiated and breached within Kenya.

In their defense, Kama Metals Limited said that the sale agreement presented by Jeanvier as the basis of seeking recovery of the goods contains an express arbitration clause.

The steel company said that the bill of lading clearly stipulates that all disputes arising thereunder must be submitted for determination by the High Court in London.

“It is not within the jurisdiction of the court to rewrite that contract and displace the parties’ agreement,” said Kama Metal Limited.

The Metal company said that the goods left the jurisdiction of the court, lawfully, and have been delivered to the port in Malaysia and that it is not legally tenable for the Kenyan court to issue orders over goods that are not within its jurisdiction, and orders which the court cannot supervise.

Kama Metal Limited said the court has no jurisdiction until leave is granted and proper service of summons abroad is effected.

The metal company said Jeanvier was not party to the sale agreement but just a representative to COMID (seller) and Hillside Mining Company LLC (buyer).

Further, Kama Metal said Jeanvier has no audience to seek enforcement other than the contracting parties.