Abstract
This article examines the issue of whether a ship repairer can actively enforce its common law possessory lien through admiralty in rem proceedings and receive its dues from the subsequent sale of the ship, or whether such actions would result in the loss of the possessory lien. This question has remained unresolved, despite being considered in several cases across multiple jurisdictions, as judges have found it unnecessary to ‘grapple with the nettle’ of possessory liens in admiralty. A recent New Zealand case, Babcock, advances the law on this issue by allowing possessory lienholders to enforce their claims through admiralty proceedings. Although this conclusion is desirable, the reasoning is unclear and is at risk of being questioned in future proceedings. This article aims to provide an explanation of the Babcock developments that is more defensible and brings greater clarity to this area of the law.