Chimezie Onuzulike, Senior Associate at G. Elias, in his article, Jurisdiction in Maritime Insurance Claims: A Review of Liverpool and London Steamship Protection and Indemnity Association Limited V M/T Tuma, explains that the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1991 creates a category of insurance claim known as ‘Maritime Insurance Claim’. This is essentially a claim for an insurance premium concerning a ship, or goods or cargo carried by the ship. This claim falls under general maritime claim in respect of which jurisdiction is conferred on the Federal High Court. This category of insurance claim is considered distinct from a simple contract of insurance in respect of which the State High Court may exercise jurisdiction. Recently, the Supreme Court of Nigeria in Liverpool and London Steamship Protection and Indemnity Association Limited v M/T Tuma made a distinction between maritime insurance claims under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1991 and simple insurance claims and held that claims for insurance premiums arising out of insurance covers made in respect of a ship fall within the exclusive admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. Chimezie brilliantly reviews the decision of the Supreme Court in that case and argues that the distinction made by the Supreme Court between simple insurance claims and maritime insurance claims is misleading. He argues that insurance contracts, whether involving a ship or cargo carried by a ship, are simple insurance contracts and not necessarily maritime claims which fall under the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.