ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS IN NIGERIA AND THE CHALLENGE OF TIME LIMITATION
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Research
Formerly, traditional means of settling disputes have been a common occurrence in Nigeria. Before the advent of colonial administration in the late 19th century, parties were represented by persons skilled in oratory prowess, who could argue and who possessed the persuasive power of argument. The most serious disputes were resolved by a council of elders that would take testimony and sometimes hear the arguments of agents advocating on behalf of the disputants. It was the general belief then that no appeal could come from those judgments partly because the people feared and believed in the elders and therefore their wisdom could not be questioned. As conservative as this would sound, embedded in this practice was what has come to be known as arbitration today.
Arbitration has been defined as the reference of a dispute or difference between not less than two parties for determination, after hearing both sides in a judicial manner, by a person or persons other than a court of competent jurisdiction. Arbitration is defined in section 57 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act as commercial arbitration whether or not administered by permanent arbitral institute. According to Redfern & Hunter, arbitration means a situation where “two or more parties, faced with a dispute which they cannot resolve for themselves, agreeing that some private individual will resolve it for them and if the arbitration runs its full course….it will not be settled by a compromise but by a decision”.
Ezike sees arbitration as a method of settling disputes under which the parties agree to be bound by the decision of a third person whose decision is, in general, final and legally binding on both parties . As far as the term arbitration is concerned, there are almost as many other definitions of the term as there are commentators on the subject.
Until now, resolutions of transnational disputes remain a relatively strange system in Nigeria, ultimately due to the incessant interference of the military in politics and governance. Although Nigeria gained her independence in 1960, it did not embrace international commercial arbitration formally by way of statute until the enactment of the Arbitration and Conciliation Decree 1988. Before then however, practitioners had been well steeped in international commercial arbitration outside the country.
The need for resorting to arbitration is more compelling considering the general advantages linked with arbitration and closely bearing in mind the lethargic attitude of Nigerian courts to the resolution of complex business disputes. This without doubt scares foreign investors. The disparities between the systems of thinking, national ideologies and methods of conducting business in various parts of the world, a national of a particular jurisdiction will be more likely to present a more convincing case by the standards of the court of her jurisdiction than will a foreigner. The negative perception of a judge’s national predisposition may prevent parties with different national or cultural backgrounds from agreeing on a suitable court to hear their disputes.
