ABSTRACT

Subject-matter jurisdiction: necessary but not sufficient 2.2 The catalogue of subject matter jurisdiction contained in section 20 of the SCA and

its predecessors2 is the result of a protracted ‘‘turf war’’ between the Admiralty Court and the common law courts. Statutes were passed to limit and punish3 improper use of the Admiralty Court. The common law courts also issued domestic anti-suit injunctions (called ‘‘writs of prohibition’’) to prevent litigants pursuing claims in the Admiralty Court.4 However, the Admiralty Court then enjoyed a period of resurgence in the nineteenth century culminating in a series of statutes the general effect of which was to

1. In Chapter 1, para. 1.3. 2. Section 22 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 and section 1 of the Administration

of Justice Act 1956. 3. During the reign of Henry IV a statute was passed (2 Hen 4, c. 11) providing for a fine of 10l to be paid

and making a litigant who had wrongfully commenced a suit in the Admiralty Court liable for ‘‘double damages’’. The statute remained in force until 1861.