TO WHAT EXTENT DOES MARITIME PIRACY IN THE GULF OF GUINEA AFFECT THE LIABILITY OF CARRIERS UNDER CONTRACTS OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA?

Abstract

Maritime piracy remains a persistent threat to commercial shipping in the Gulf of Guinea, posing significant legal challenges to the allocation of risk and liability under contracts of carriage of goods by sea. This paper examines the extent to which maritime piracy in the Gulf of Guinea affects the liability of carriers for loss of or damage to cargo. It critically analyses whether piracy constitutes an excepted peril capable of exonerating carriers from liability, or whether carriers remain legally accountable due to failures in seaworthiness, due diligence, or contractual risk management. The paper is grounded in a doctrinal analysis of relevant international legal regimes, particularly the Hague–Visby Rules, the Hamburg Rules, and the Rotterdam Rules, as well as applicable principles of Common Law and Nigerian maritime legislation. Judicial decisions and standard form contracts, including bills of lading and charterparty clauses, were also examined to assess how piracy-related losses are treated in practice. The paper concludes that while international carriage of goods regimes provides certain defences to carriers, the effectiveness of such defences is significantly constrained by evolving standards of due diligence and risk prevention. The paper recommends strengthened contractual clarity, enhanced compliance with security obligations, and legal reforms to better reflect contemporary piracy risks in the Gulf of Guinea.