Why did English common-law courts restrict the Admiralty Court's powers?

During the first half of the 17th century, English common-law judges successfully restricted the High Court of Admiralty to adjudicating only "things done upon the sea," effectively stripping it of its broader commercial jurisdiction.1

This restriction was driven by several key factors:

• Jurisdictional Competition: The Admiralty Court had expanded its reach far beyond maritime matters into general commercial law, encroaching on the territory of the common-law courts.12
• Procedural Differences: Unlike common-law courts, the Admiralty Court functioned without juries and utilized procedures derived from continental civil law, which were often perceived as less cumbersome.12
• Institutional Rivalry: The Admiralty was a royal court favored by the Crown and merchants for its efficiency and specialized expertise. Common-law jurists, such as Sir Edward Coke, viewed the common law as the supreme authority and actively resisted the influence of competing jurisdictions, including the Admiralty and ecclesiastical courts, to protect the supremacy of the common law.13

Ultimately, the common-law judges prevailed, forcing the Admiralty Court into a period of comparative insignificance during the 17th century.12