ENFORCEMENT OF ENERGY ARBITRATION AWARDS AND JUDICIAL PRACTICE IN NIGERIA

Abstract

Parties to arbitration conflicts also anticipate awards at the conclusion of the proceedings. Parties should be bound by awards that are definitive and binding. Certain judicial procedures, however, prevent awards in the oil and gas sectors from being enforced in Nigeria, necessitating their transfer to other jurisdictions such as the USA of and the UK. The study compared the application of Nigerian energy arbitration awards to those of other countries, such as the United States, to see if they were in compliance with international treaties and case law. This research was motivated by Hybrid Theory. Law reports, laws, arbitration awards, and arbitration rules from Nigeria and the USA were used in data compilation. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act LFN A18 2004, Lagos State Arbitration Law 2009, and other related arbitration laws, regulations, awards, and conventions were studied. Sheriffs and Civil Processes Act 1945, Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Act 1977, Federal Arbitration Act 1925, New York Convention 1958, International Centre for Investment Disputes Convention 1975, Reciprocal Enforcement and Judgment Act 1990, Uniform Arbitration Act 1995, UN Commission on International Trade Law, Model Arbitration Law 1985, United States Arbitration Act 1985, UN Commission on International Trade Law, Model Arbitration Law 1985, United States of America Arbitration Act 1985, United States of America Arbitration Act Cases that were relevant were also examined. Structured interviews with chartered arbitrators in Nigeria and the United States of America, officials of the Lagos Court of Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association, and the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators branches in Nigeria, New York, and North America were used in collecting qualitative data. Content review was employed in examining the information gathered. As a result of frivolous lawsuits for award recognition, Nigerian judicial arbitration procedure dampens the implementation of energy awards. Because of the size of its oil and gas investments, Nigeria has a lot of interest in energy arbitration. Because of compliance with international conventions such as the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes Convention and the New York Convention, the USA, produced tremendous revenue from arbitration. Due to the availability of infrastructural facilities for arbitration and favourable judicial procedure, the United States of America had a high degree of exposure to arbitration. In Nigeria, the judicial practise of arbitration is discouraging and inconvenient because lawyers regard it as though it were an appealable decision. They always take a dispute to court on any imaginable question. As a result, the interviewees expressed dissatisfaction with the Nigerian judicial system due to time waste and various technicalities such as operation and response to court procedures.

Due to the difficulties encountered in enforcing awards, energy arbitration is not always pursued in Nigeria. For a successful arbitration outcome in Nigeria, structural changes including the consolidation of arbitration laws should be implemented. Arbitration should be added to the exclusive list of rights in the constitution, and delocalization of arbitration would improve the effectiveness of Nigerian arbitration.