Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Nigeria and the Jigsaw of Limitation Period: The Need for Compliance with Global Best Practices

Q4 Social Sciences Mizan Law Review Pub Date : 2021-09-30 DOI:10.4314/mlr.v15i1.4
D. Eyongndi
{"title":"Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Nigeria and the Jigsaw of Limitation Period: The Need for Compliance with Global Best Practices","authors":"D. Eyongndi","doi":"10.4314/mlr.v15i1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Nigeria, the limitation period begins to run from the date the dispute leading to the arbitration arose instead of when the award was rendered. While highlighting the rationale and effect of limitation period to the jurisdiction of court, I argue that the period set out in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) for enforcement of arbitral awards fails to countenance the inherent delays in Nigeria’s justice system which can be exploited to render the enforcement of an award nugatory. The operationalisation of limitation period unless amended, can be a dissuading factor for choosing Nigeria as a seat of international arbitration which rubs her of the attendant benefits. It is further argued that, anyone, wishing to enforce an award in Nigeria, must ingeniously act timeously to avoid untoward outcome due to the repressive limitation period. This article identifies registration of award pursuant to Foreign Judgment (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act as a leeway to enforce foreign arbitral awards. It compares the practice in Nigeria with jurisdictions like India, Canada, United Kingdom and Ethiopia and draw lessons for Nigeria. It makes a case for amendment of the existing legal framework to bring the law on limitation of time in tandem with global best practices.","PeriodicalId":30178,"journal":{"name":"Mizan Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mizan Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/mlr.v15i1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Nigeria, the limitation period begins to run from the date the dispute leading to the arbitration arose instead of when the award was rendered. While highlighting the rationale and effect of limitation period to the jurisdiction of court, I argue that the period set out in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) for enforcement of arbitral awards fails to countenance the inherent delays in Nigeria’s justice system which can be exploited to render the enforcement of an award nugatory. The operationalisation of limitation period unless amended, can be a dissuading factor for choosing Nigeria as a seat of international arbitration which rubs her of the attendant benefits. It is further argued that, anyone, wishing to enforce an award in Nigeria, must ingeniously act timeously to avoid untoward outcome due to the repressive limitation period. This article identifies registration of award pursuant to Foreign Judgment (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act as a leeway to enforce foreign arbitral awards. It compares the practice in Nigeria with jurisdictions like India, Canada, United Kingdom and Ethiopia and draw lessons for Nigeria. It makes a case for amendment of the existing legal framework to bring the law on limitation of time in tandem with global best practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
尼日利亚仲裁裁决的执行和诉讼时效的拼图:遵守全球最佳实践的必要性
在尼日利亚,时效期从导致仲裁的争议产生之日起算,而不是从作出裁决之日起算。在强调时效期对法院管辖权的理由和影响的同时,我认为,《仲裁与调解法》(ACA)中规定的执行仲裁裁决的期限未能支持尼日利亚司法系统固有的延误,这可以被利用来使裁决的执行无效。除非修订,否则时效期的实施可能是选择尼日利亚作为国际仲裁所在地的劝阻因素,这会使她失去随之而来的好处。有人进一步认为,任何希望在尼日利亚执行裁决的人都必须巧妙地及时采取行动,以避免由于压制性限制期而产生的不利结果。本文将根据《外国判决(互惠执行)法》对裁决进行登记作为执行外国仲裁裁决的一种余地。它将尼日利亚的做法与印度、加拿大、英国和埃塞俄比亚等司法管辖区进行了比较,并为尼日利亚吸取了经验教训。它提出了修改现有法律框架的理由,使关于时间限制的法律与全球最佳做法保持一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Effect of Formalization of Rural Women’s Land Rights in a Plural Justice System: The Case of the Sidama Regional State Concurrence of Crimes under Ethiopian Law: General Principles vis-à-vis Tax Law Regulation of Group of Companies in Ethiopia: A Comparative Overview Private Security Companies in Ethiopia: An Insight from a Rights Perspective Business and Human Rights in Ethiopia: The Status of the Law and the Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1