2012•Arbitration InternationalRequires access

Nigeria's Appellate Courts, Arbitration and Extra-Legal Jurisdiction: Facts, Problems, and Solutions

Ola O. Olatawura

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

Since the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law (‘MAL’) 1985 became the generally adopted standard, local courts’ powers and roles in arbitration-related issues have been strictly limited. This article examines the jurisdiction of Nigeria's appellate courts under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004. It contends that sections 34 and 57, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004, which are based on Articles 5 and 6, UNCITRAL MAL 1985, limit litigation in arbitration matters to only first instance courts. The current free appeals disregards the law, promote delays, frustrates the policy of finality and speedy settlement, and affects the choice of ‘Nigerian law’ in arbitration agreements. These results whittle the growth of the arbitration industry and the desire to make Nigeria a credible regional base for international arbitration services. There being no exceptional case for appeals in the law, appellate courts should reject or summarily dismiss cases for want of jurisdiction. However because of advantages of appellate courts' jurisdiction, the courts and legislator must now carefully craft doctrine and statutes to reduce unnecessary appeals that defeat the basis for arbitration.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Since the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law (‘MAL’) 1985 became the generally adopted standard, local courts’ powers and roles in arbitration-related issues have been strictly limited. This article examines the jurisdiction of Nigeria's appellate courts under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004. It contends that sections 34 and 57, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004, which are based on Articles 5 and 6, UNCITRAL MAL 1985, limit litigation in arbitration matters to only first instance courts. The current free appeals disregards the law, promote delays, frustrates the policy of finality and speedy settlement, and affects the choice of ‘Nigerian law’ in arbitration agreements. These results whittle the growth of the arbitration industry and the desire to make Nigeria a credible regional base for international arbitration services. There being no exceptional case for appeals in the law, appellate courts should reject or summarily dismiss cases for want of jurisdiction. However because of advantages of appellate courts' jurisdiction, the courts and legislator must now carefully craft doctrine and statutes to reduce unnecessary appeals that defeat the basis for arbitration.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Since the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law (‘MAL’) 1985 became the generally adopted standard, local courts’ powers and roles in arbitration-related issues have been strictly limited. This article examines the jurisdiction of Nigeria's appellate courts under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004. It contends that sections 34 and 57, Cap A. 18 LFN 2004, which are based on Articles 5 and 6, UNCITRAL MAL 1985, limit litigation in arbitration matters to only first instance courts. The current free appeals disregards the law, promote delays, frustrates the policy of finality and speedy settlement, and affects the choice of ‘Nigerian law’ in arbitration agreements. These results whittle the growth of the arbitration industry and the desire to make Nigeria a credible regional base for international arbitration services. There being no exceptional case for appeals in the law, appellate courts should reject or summarily dismiss cases for want of jurisdiction. However because of advantages of appellate courts' jurisdiction, the courts and legislator must now carefully craft doctrine and statutes to reduce unnecessary appeals that defeat the basis for arbitration.

Key concepts: Arbitration, Jurisdiction, Law, Compulsory arbitration, Conciliation, Settlement (finance), Statute, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Nigeria's Appellate Courts, Arbitration and Extra-Legal Jurisdiction: Facts, Problems, and Solutions — Research Paper | ScholarLens