NIGERIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Muyiwa Ogungbenro and Stephanie Agbasi, Olajide Oyewole LLP
an unfavourable – but validly obtained – outcome after the fact. Enforcement mechanics remain firmly UNCITRAL- aligned On the enforcement side, Nigerian practice continues to track the UNCITRAL Model Law closely. Awards are not appealable in the traditional sense; a party’s only recourse is a set-aside application on the limited grounds set out in Section 55 (3) of the AMA. The courts have consistently signalled that they will inter - vene only where a statutory ground is clearly estab - lished and not merely arguable. Two newer, opt-in mechanisms are worth flagging. First, parties to a domestic arbitration may agree in advance to allow an appeal to the court on a pure question of Nigerian law, which is a narrow route unavailable in international arbitrations and entirely dependent on express agreement. Second, the AMA introduces the Award Review Tribunal, a mechanism under which parties can elect to have a fresh arbitral tribunal reconsider an award before resorting to the courts at all. Neither mechanism applies by default; both require explicit drafting. Practitioners negotiating arbitration clauses under the AMA should treat these as deliberate drafting choices rather than assump - tions, since silence means that neither applies. Institutional follow-through: LACIAC’S award review rules The Award Review Tribunal concept is not yet fully operational without implementing rules, and the Lagos Chamber of Commerce International Arbitration Cen - tre (LACIAC) has moved to fill that gap. Its draft Award Review Proceedings Rules are designed to operation - alise the Section 56 review mechanism, giving parties who opt into it a concrete procedural pathway. A cautionary international coda: the P&ID litigation No survey of Nigerian arbitration jurisprudence in this period is complete without reference to the long-run - ning Process & Industrial Developments Ltd v Federal Republic of Nigeria saga, even though the core fraud judgment was rendered by the English courts rather than Nigerian ones. Nigeria successfully had a roughly USD11 billion award set aside after an English court found that the arbitration had been procured through
bribery of a public official and improper retention of Nigeria’s privileged legal documents by the claim - ant. The case has since generated further appellate litigation over costs. In 2025, the UK Supreme Court upheld a sterling-denominated costs award in Nige - ria’s favour. The court held that compensation should track the currency in which the underlying litigation expense was actually incurred. While decided outside Nigeria, the case looms large over domestic practice. It has prompted renewed attention – reflected in the National Arbitration Policy – to how government ministries and agencies manage high-value arbitrations. It stands as a reminder that the integrity of the arbitral process, not just the finality of awards, remains a live judicial concern even at the highest levels. Practical takeaways for counsel Key advice for counsel includes the following. • Draft the seat carefully. Nigerian courts will not supervise or annul awards seated abroad, even in disputes involving Nigerian parties; enforcement objections are the only route available domestically for foreign-seated awards. • Do not rely on “misconduct” as a merits appeal. Courts are reading the ground narrowly, and evidentiary or interpretative disagreements with a tribunal are unlikely to succeed. • Conduct during the arbitration matters later. Par - ticipating without objection, performing under an award, or delaying a challenge can undermine a subsequent set-aside application, regardless of its technical merits. • Opt-in mechanisms need express drafting. Neither the domestic appeal-on-law route nor the Award Review Tribunal applies automatically – build them into the arbitration clause if wanted. • Watch LACIAC’s rules. Once finalised, they will shape whether the Award Review Tribunal becomes a genuine alternative to court-based challenges. Conclusion Three years on, Nigerian courts appear to be settling into a broadly pro-arbitration posture: respecting party autonomy, confining set-aside grounds to their statu -
668 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook