A Reexamination of the Grounds for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Description

ABSTRACT

A Reexamination of the Grounds for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Ridwan ‘Lanre Ajetunmobi*

Understandably, there can be dissatisfaction with a decision in any dispute settlement process. So, like any other dispute resolution mechanism, arbitration has procedures that an aggrieved side can invoke to challenge an arbitral award. The grounds for setting aside are provided by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1988 (hereinafter refers to as ‘the Act’). This paper examines the various grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under the Act to highlight and ascertain whether those grounds are adequate or not. The paper finds that the grounds provided in the Act appear to be exhaustive, however needs improvement, necessitating recommendations geared towards reform.

Keywords: Arbitral Award, Grounds for setting aside, ACA.

INTRODUCTION
Arbitral awards are usually expressed as “final, binding and to be complied with without unnecessary delay.”₁ Thus, it is both reasonable and logical that having willingly chosen arbitrators, the parties should be bound by the arbitrators’ decision.₂ An arbitral award is the outcome or result of the arbitral proceedings.₃ The arbitral award is regarded as a final and conclusive decision on all matters submitted to arbitration by the parties.₄ It is a legal document which must contain enough information to enable the court, if necessary, to enforce it without further enquiry and for it to serve the purpose of res judicata.₅ Thus, once an arbitral award is given, unless there is a good reason not to recognize and enforce it, the court would assist the enforcement of the award by permitting it to be enforced like a judgement.₆ There are two fundamental principles underlying the finality of an award. First, the logic is that the parties having chosen their arbitrators, on whom they have trust and confidence to judge fairly and justly, after giving the awards, they should not be seen to lose the confidence. Secondly, the parties appointed their arbitrators based on their experience, qualification and expertise in the area of the dispute referred to them. It should follow that the parties have the conviction that the chances of making a wrongful decision are low.₇

** Research Fellow, Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS). Email:

aj********@ya***.com

1. CJ Amasike, ‘The Fundamentals and overview of Commercial Arbitration in Nigeria’, in CJ Amasike (ed) Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Africa (The Regent 2005) 25.
2. Triana Ltd v UTB Plc [2009] 12 NWLR (pt 1155) 313, 343 (Oredola JCA).
3. Mainstreet Bank Capital Ltd v Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation Plc. [2018] 14 NWLR429. See also Paul Idornigie, Commercial Arbitration Law and Practice in Nigeria (LawLords Publications 2015) 250.
4. NITEL Ltd v Okeke (2017) 9 NWLR (Part 1571) 443-444.
5. Fundamentals of Arbitration Law and Practice in Nigeria, (Professional Course on Alternative Dispute Resolution, 2007).
6. AS Ogwuche, Compendium of Laws under the Nigerian Legal System, (2nd edn, Maiyati Chambers 2008) 151.
7. JO Orojo & MA Ajomo, Law and Practice of Arbitration & Conciliation in Nigeria, (Mbeyi& Associates1999) 269.

THE GRAVITAS REVIEW OF BUSINESS & PROPERTY LAW VOL.12 NO.1