To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Introduction
Over the past two decades, arbitration has increasingly been
adopted as a preferred mechanism for resolving cross-border
commercial disputes globally, either on a stand-alone basis or in
conjunction with other forms of ADR.1 The year 2024
witnessed a significant uptick in the use of arbitration to resolve
commercial disputes in Nigeria. This came about because of a
substantial increase in foreign direct investment into Nigeria and
Nigeria’s expanding participation in intra-Africa and global
trade and investment, where parties seek efficient, enforceable
solutions for resolving complex disputes.
The year 2024 also marked the first anniversary of Nigeria’s
newly enacted Arbitration and Mediation Act, a legislation that is
now reputed to be one of the most innovative pieces of arbitration
legislation the world over.
Within the wider African region, the year 2024 not only
witnessed a significant increase in the use of arbitration to
resolve cross-border commercial and investment disputes but more
importantly, a new trend emerged with the enactment of national
arbitration policies across Africa whereby African parties
preferred African seats and appointed African arbitrators to
resolve cross-border commercial and investment disputes involving
Africans.
Another new trend that emerged for the first time within the
African region is the filing of intra–African arbitral award
enforcement proceedings. In this regard, our Firm, Stren & Blan
Partners, played a pivotal role by representing Zadok East Africa
Limited, a Kenyan Construction Company to institute the first
Third-Party Funded (TPF) international arbitral award enforcement
proceedings under the Arbitration and Mediation Act (AMA) 2023
against Rwanda Revenue Authority.2 This landmark case
highlighted the practical application of TPF in arbitration,
opening new avenues for financially constrained parties to access
justice.
This newsletter seeks to spotlight the above notable
developments in 2024, as well as other key insights and trends for
2025 including:
Key Arbitration Issues Addressed in 2024 By the Nigerian
Appellate Courts
I. Duty of Court to give effect to arbitration clause in
an agreement.
On the above principle, the Court of Appeal in Agu &
Anor v. Ericmany Ltd & Anor3 reaffirmed the
duty of Courts to enforce arbitration clauses and the binding
nature of arbitration clauses. The Court reminded Parties of their
obligation to arbitrate disputes rather than resort to litigation,
emphasizing that courts will enforce arbitration agreements as the
foundation of the dispute resolution process.
On the same subject matter, the Court of Appeal in
Dangote Industries (Zambia) Ltd v. Ima (Zambia)
Ltd4 clarifying the scope of arbitration
agreements held that arbitration agreements must be explicit to
avoid disputes over their applicability to extraneous issues or
parties. This decision serves as a caution for contract drafters to
use clear and precise language. The courts reiterated that
arbitration clauses symbolise parties’ trust in arbitration as
a voluntary and effective mechanism for resolving disputes.
II. Condition precedent for the grant of an order
staying proceedings pending reference to arbitration.
Under the above principle, the Court of Appeal in Agu
& Anor v. Ericmany Ltd & Anor5
commenting on an application for a stay of proceedings pending
arbitration under Section 5(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act LFN2004, held that “there is no doubt that the trial
Court had the power to order a stay of proceedings pending
arbitration. However, such an order is not granted as a matter of
course or merely because it has been applied for…the Court before
which an application for a stay of proceedings pending
arbitration is made must satisfy itself that (a) there is no
sufficient reason why the matter should not be referred to
arbitration in accordance with the arbitration agreement; and
(b)that the applicant was at the time when the action was commenced
and still remains ready and willing to do all things necessary for
the proper conduct of the arbitration. Therefore, a decision
granting such a stay must reflect a consideration and evaluation of
the facts establishing the existence of these two
conditions.”
It must be noted that the two conditions cited by the Court of
Appeal above are no longer applicable under Section 5 of the newly
enacted Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023. Under the new
provision, all a party needs to show to obtain an order for a stay
of proceedings pending reference to arbitration as a matter of
course, is that the arbitration agreement is not void or
inoperative and that his application for a stay of proceedings is
made timeously before submitting any statement on the substance of
the dispute.
III. When to raise the issue of jurisdiction in arbitral
proceedings.
The Court of Appeal relying on the Supreme Court decision in
NNPC v. KLIFCO (Nig) Ltd,6 re-emphasized the importance
of raising jurisdiction issues in arbitration timeously in the case
of Dangote Industries (Zambia) Ltd v. Ima (Zambia) Ltd7
when it held that the position of the law on the issue of
jurisdiction as applicable in the usual way or in regular Court
does not apply to arbitral proceedings. Issue of jurisdiction must
be raised in arbitral proceedings within the time stipulated in the
Arbitration Act (ACA). In NNPC v KLIFCO the Supreme Court had held
thus:
“The position of the law applicable in the usual way or
in regular Courts does not apply to arbitral proceedings. Section
12(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) governs the
issue of jurisdiction in arbitral proceedings… the position of
the issue of jurisdiction is that jurisdiction to hear and
determine a dispute is raised before the arbitration panel within
the time stipulated in the Arbitration Act.” The lower Court
was right when it relied on Sections 12(3) and 33 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) and the Court
discountenanced the Appellant’s objection to the jurisdiction
of the Tribunal. It is worthy to note certain fundamental issues
relating to arbitration. First and foremost, arbitration is not
litigation. In litigation, jurisdictional issues can be raised at
any stage of the proceedings up to the Supreme Court. In arbitral
proceedings, the issue of jurisdiction is regulated by Sections
12(3) and 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
(ACA).”
It is to be noted that even though the Supreme Court and the
Court of Appeal relied on Section 12(3) of the now repealed
Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) LFN 2004 in the above-cited
decision, Section 12 (3) of the ACA interpreted by the Supreme
Court and the Court of Appeal is in pari materia with Section 14
(3) of the AMA 2023. So, the above-cited cases are applicable with
full force under the AMA 2023.
IV. The nature of arbitral proceedings, and the
Court’s reluctance to interfere with arbitral
awards.
On the above vital aspect of arbitration, the Court of Appeal in
the case of Dangote Industries (Zambia) Ltd v. Ima (Zambia)
Ltd8 reemphasized the fundamental basis of arbitration
when it held that the objective of arbitration is to obtain a fair
resolution of disputes by an impartial Tribunal without unnecessary
delay and expense.
The Court observed that a court hearing an application to set
aside an award does not assume the jurisdiction of an appellate
Court. In other words, the Court will not reevaluate the evidence
to consider whether there was observance or non-observance with the
law. The Court of Appeal relied on the famous dictum of the Supreme
Court per Nnaemeka Agu in Commercial Assurance Ltd. v. Alhaji
Buraimoh Alli,9 where it was held thus:
“the underlying principle is that parties to a dispute
have a choice. They may resort to the normal machinery for
administration of justice by going to the regular Courts of the
land and have their disputes determined both as to the fact and the
law, by the Courts. Or they may choose the arbitrator to be the
Judge between them. If they take the latter course they cannot,
when the award is good on the face of it object to the award on
grounds of law or of fact.”
The above decision, once again, reinforces Nigeria’s
position as a proarbitration jurisdiction.
V. On the duty of Courts to Enforce Arbitral
Awards.
The Supreme Court in A.G. Bayelsa State v. Odok10
reaffirmed the duty and authority of Nigerian courts to recognize
and enforce arbitral awards. The decision emphasized that arbitral
awards, once rendered, are binding and enforceable unless
successfully challenged on legally permissible grounds. This case
is significant because the arbitral award in question was issued in
favour of a legal practitioner carrying on practice under a
business name against a sub-national government. The
sub-national government having taken benefit of the contract
between it and the business name and participated in the
arbitration turned around to argue that the arbitration agreement
contained in the contract was null and void because the business
name upon which the legal practitioner was carrying on his practice
was unknown to law. However, the Supreme Court in refusing the
application to set aside the award held that:
“It is trite that recognition and enforcement of an
arbitral award is a vital part of arbitration as without which the
whole arbitration process is pointless.”
Furthermore, the Supreme Court used the opportunity to settle
the issue of whether a law firm registered as a business name
can carry on business when it held thus:
“I have failed to find the principle that a law firm
registered as a business name cannot carry on business.? As the
name implies and as defined under Section 588 of the Companies and
Allied Matters Act (CAMA) (now Section 868 (1) of CAMA 2020), a
“business name” is the name under which “any
business is carried on”, either by an individual, firm or a
corporation. Business is carried on by agreements. The day-to-day
transactions of a law firm is to accept briefs from clients and get
paid for its legal services rendered. Is each of those briefs not a
contract? Of course it is! To be frank, appellant’s contention
does not hold water and by prudence it is not expected to be argued
among learned counsel.”
Emerging Trends Within the Nigerian Arbitration Space
I. Growth and Adoption of ThirdParty Funding in
Arbitration:
For many parties, especially those with strong claims but little
funding, the expense of arbitration proceedings remains a major
obstacle. 11 To salvage this obstacle, the
AMA12 introduced TPF into Nigeria’s arbitration
landscape as a modern solution to this challenge. Basically, TPF
allows an external funder to finance one party’s arbitration
expenses in exchange for a portion of the financial award, should
the claim succeed. 13 This innovation has significantly
increased access to arbitration by alleviating the financial burden
on affected parties and ensuring that cost is no longer a barrier
to justice.
As mentioned in the introduction, Stren & Blan Partners
achieved a groundbreaking milestone in 2024 by representing
Zadok East Africa Limited in Nigeria’s first-ever international
arbitration award enforcement proceedings against the Rwanda
Revenue Authority, an agency of the Government of Rwanda. This
award recognition and enforcement proceedings14
highlight the practical benefits of TPF in complex, high-value
disputes. This development positions Nigeria as a viable
jurisdiction for international arbitration, especially for
financially constrained parties with strong claims. As more parties
and funders embrace TPF, it is expected to reshape the arbitration
landscape in Nigeria, ensuring fairness and enhancing access to
justice.
II. Sustainability and ESG Disputes:
Disputes related to Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG)
obligations are increasingly finding their way into
arbitration.15 These cases often involve multinational
corporations operating in resourceintensive industries like oil and
gas. Nigerian arbitration is poised to handle disputes involving
emissions laws, renewable energy projects, and environmental
degradation as sustainability gains international attention.
Arbitration is increasingly becoming the preferred mechanism for
resolving disputes related to Environmental, Social, and Governance
(ESG) obligations in Nigeria and across Africa. The flexibility to
appoint arbitrators16 with the specialized expertise
required to navigate technical ESG disputes, such as those
involving environmental remediation, carbon emissions, and
corporate governance standards, makes arbitration particularly
suited for these matters. 17 This capability ensures
that disputes are resolved efficiently and with a deep
understanding of their complexities, enhancing confidence in
arbitration as a reliable tool for ESG conflict resolution.
III. Integration with AfCFTA Dispute
Resolution:
With its 2023 Protocol on Investment, 18 the African
Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is revamping investor-state
dispute resolution throughout Africa. It highlights the importance
of promoting local content in arbitration by promoting the use of
arbitrators who have experience in African sectors such as
infrastructure, construction, and energy. The aforementioned steps
are intended to promote a safe and stable investment climate
throughout the continent and increase the legitimacy and
acceptability of arbitration decisions among domestic and foreign
parties.
The AfCFTA introduced a Dispute Settlement Mechanism emphasising
arbitration and mediation. 19 Nigeria, as one of
Africa’s largest economies, 20 is expected to play a
central role in regional arbitration under AfCFTA. This will
increase cross-border arbitration cases involving trade,
intellectual property, and investment disputes.
IV. Technology and Digital Arbitration:
The global disruptions brought on by the COVID-19 epidemic
accelerated the trend of the arbitration community’s growing
adoption of videoconferencing and remote hearings. 21
The dispute resolution process now relies heavily on virtual
platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams. This shift improved
accessibility, lowered expenses and made it more flexible,
especially for cross-border arbitration involving parties from
outside Nigeria. Nigerian-based arbitration institutions, including
the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration Lagos
(RCICAL), have incorporated provisions for virtual hearings in
their procedural rules. These developments align with global
practices, where institutions like the ICC Court of Arbitration and
the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) 22
actively promote digital tools to ensure efficiency and continuity
in proceedings.
Projections for Arbitration Practice in Nigeria in 2025
I. Increased Use of Third-Party Funding
(TPF):
After being introduced to Nigeria’s arbitration scene under
the AMA 2023, TPF is expected to have a major impact on arbitration
practice in 2025 given its increasing adoption. Through external
finance secured in exchange for a share of any final award, TPF
makes arbitral remedies accessible to financially disadvantaged
parties with legitimate claims. 23 The first-ever
international arbitration award enforcement proceedings against the
Rwanda Revenue Authority, an agency of the Government of Rwanda in
Nigeria, which Stren & Blan Partners was instructed to
institute in 2024, is proof that this trend is revolutionary. Zadok
East Africa Limited created a precedent for the effective use of
TPF in intricate, highvalue cases when it instituted an action to
enforce a $1.9 million award. The usage of TPF is anticipated to
increase in 2025, especially in instances involving international
arbitration and resource-intensive disputes in industries like
technology, construction, and energy. The development does,
however, also highlight the necessity of a strong regulatory
framework to handle concerns about ethical issues, disclosure
requirements between funders, claimants, and arbitrators, and
transparency. 24 Nigeria’s arbitration practice is
expected to grow more competitive, inclusive, and in line with
international norms as more parties and funders choose this
financing mechanism, enhancing its standing as one of Africa’s
premier centres for dispute resolution. 25
II. Strengthened Judicial Support for
Arbitration:
Following the courts’ pro-arbitration stance in 2024, it is
expected that the Nigerian judiciary will continue to adopt
arbitration-friendly policies, particularly in enforcement
proceedings under the AMA 2023. Some notable provisions of the AMA
2023, such as the use of emergency arbitrators, consolidation of
arbitration proceedings, the introduction of mediation, the use of
an award review tribunal, and interim measures in arbitration, are
yet to be examined by the Supreme Court. Consequently, it is
anticipated that the Apex Court will establish judicial precedents
in these areas.
III. Focus on Training and Capacity
Building:
To keep pace with evolving arbitration trends, there will be a
concerted effort to enhance the skills of arbitrators, legal
practitioners, and institutional staff. Training programs focusing
on emerging areas26 like Environmental, Social, and
Governance (ESG) disputes, digital arbitration, and cross-border
investment cases will gain momentum. We expect more collaborations
with international arbitration bodies to further bolster expertise
and credibility, ensuring that practitioners are well-equipped to
handle complex disputes.
IV. Rise of Industry-Specific Arbitration:
With Nigeria’s diversification efforts, industries such as
technology, construction, energy, and entertainment may experience
a surge in arbitration adoption. 27 Tailored arbitration
frameworks could emerge to address unique industry disputes and
establish specialized panels of arbitrators with relevant expertise
in these sectors.
V. Use of Technology
Arbitration procedures will likely transform because of
artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) as well as
digitalisation. AI solutions can improve case management, speed up
document review, and help with decisionmaking. In order to help
arbitrators and legal professionals make wellinformed decisions,
AI-powered platforms, for example, may evaluate enormous datasets
to find pertinent precedents and forecast possible results thereby
increasing an arbitration’s efficiency and expediting
procedures. 28
VI. Global Trends that Would Influence Nigerian
Arbitration in 2025
Arbitration techniques in Nigeria are expected to be impacted by
the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in dispute
settlement procedures globally in 2025. In the commercial sector,
e-commerce platforms like PayPal and eBay have resolved millions of
disputes through algorithm-driven Online Dispute Resolution (ODR),
showcasing the potential for AI to streamline and expedite
decision-making. 29 Several international organisations
have incorporated artificial intelligence into their daily
business to help reduce common obstacles. 30 Arbitral
institutions are establishing precise guidelines for the
application of AI in arbitration. Notably, the Silicon Valley
Arbitration and Mediation Centre (SVAMC) on 30th April 2024
published draft AI Guidelines. 31 These guidelines are
broken down into three parts for arbitrators, participants, and
party representatives. 32 The use and dangers of AI
applications, confidentiality protection, disclosure standards, and
the obligation to uphold procedural integrity while avoiding the
delegation of decisionmaking authority to AI systems are all
covered in these principles.
For Nigeria, these developments signal the need to anticipate
and adapt to the growing role of AI in arbitration. In 2025,
Nigerian arbitration institutions may incorporate AI best practices
into their procedural rules, enhancing efficiency and compliance
with global standards. Leveraging AI tools for document review,
case management, and even evidence authentication can significantly
transform arbitration practice in Nigeria. As global trends evolve,
the Nigerian arbitration community is well-positioned to align with
these advancements, ensuring competitiveness in the international
arbitration landscape.
Conclusion
The developments in Nigeria’s arbitration landscape in 2024
have underscored its critical importance as a dispute resolution
mechanism in an increasingly interconnected world. With the AMA
2023 providing a modern legal framework, Nigerian arbitration
continues to gain prominence as a preferred option for resolving
disputes, both domestically and internationally. The
judiciary’s consistent pro-arbitration decisions have
reinforced the sanctity of arbitration agreements, supported the
efficient conduct of arbitral proceedings, and upheld the
enforceability of awards, thereby enhancing the confidence of
parties in the process. As we look to 2025, the projected
trends—ranging from the growing adoption of third-party
funding to the integration of technology and sustainability
principles—present exciting opportunities for Nigeria to
strengthen its arbitration framework further. The introduction of
AI-driven processes, the rise of industryspecific arbitration, and
Nigeria’s alignment with AfCFTA’s dispute resolution
mechanisms are poised to position the country as a hub for
arbitration in Africa. Stren & Blan Partners remains committed
to championing innovative and effective arbitration solutions,
leveraging our experience in groundbreaking cases such as
Nigeria’s first TPF-funded arbitration to drive progress in the
field. As arbitration continues to evolve, stakeholders are
encouraged to remain proactive, embracing these advancements to
ensure that arbitration remains a reliable, efficient, and
equitable tool for dispute resolution in Nigeria and beyond.
Footnotes
1. White & Case/Quen Mary International Arbitration
Survey: Adapting arbitration to a changing world
https://strenandblanpartnersmy.sharepoint.com/personal/josephsiyaidon_strena
ndblan_com/Documents/Documents/Arbitration%20Materials/LON0320037-
QMUL-International-Arbitration-Survey-2021_19_WEB.pdf
2. Kenyan company targets Rwandan state assets in
Nigeria, https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/kenyan-company-targets-rwandanstate-assets-in-nigeria
Accessed 17th January 2025.
3. (2024) LPELR-62081(CA) (Pp 29 – 30 Paras C -
E).
4. (2024) LPELR-62899(CA) (Pp 24 – 24 Paras B -
E).
5. (Supra) (Pp 5 – 6 Paras B – E).
6. (2011) 10 NWLR (pt. 1255) 229
7. (Supra) (Pp 9 – 12 Paras A – F).
8. (Supra) (Pp 9 – 12 Paras A – F).
9. (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt. 232) 710 at 725
10. (2024) LPELR-63035(SC) (Pp 26 – 28 Paras E -
C).
11. NICArb, The Adoption of Third-Party Funding
(TPF) In the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023, https://blog.nicarb.org/index.php/2024/07/09/theadoption-of-third-party-funding-tpf-in-the-arbitration-and-mediation-act2023/
Accessed 17th January 2025
12. Section 61 Arbitration and Mediation Act
2023.
13. Third-Party Funding Arbitration in Nigeria https://strenandblan.com/wpcontent/uploads/2023/01/Third-Party-Funding-of-Arbitration-in-Nigeria-.pdf,
Accessed 17th January 2025.
14. Kenyan company targets Rwandan state assets in
Nigeria, https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/kenyan-company-targets-rwandanstate-assets-in-nigeria,
Accessed 17th January 2025.
15. Arbitration is fast becoming the frontrunner for
ESG-related disputes in Africa, https://www.africanlawbusiness.com/expert-views/20840-arbitration-is-fastbecoming-the-frontrunner-for-esg-related-disputes-in-africa/,
Accessed 17th January 2025.
16. Section 7 Arbitration and Mediation Act
2023.
17. The Future of ESG in Africa: From Principles to
Practice, and the Role of Arbitration in Dispute Resolution, https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=369d43da-6c70-4b3a-8e00-
4d089841548d Accessed 17th January 2025.
18. Protocol to the Agreement Establishing the
African Continental Free Trade Area on Investment https://edit.wti.org/document/show/e5d51824-c467-4e24-922b3fb376d89550
Accessed 17th January 2025.
19. Article 2 Protocol on Rules and Procedures on
the Settlement of Disputes, https://africanlii.org/akn/aa-au/act/protocol/2018/rules-and-procedures-on-thesettlement-of-disputes/eng@2018-03-21
Accessed 17th January 2025.
20. Quantifying the impact on Nigeria of the African
Continental Free Trade Area, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/quantifying-the-impact-on-nigeria-of-theafrican-continental-free-trade-area/
Accessed 17th January 2025.
21. Leveraging Technology for Fair, Effective, and
Efficient International
22. Arbitration Proceedings https://iccwbo.org/news-publications/arbitration-adrrules-and-tools/icc-arbitration-and-adr-commission-report-on-leveragingtechnology-for-fair-effective-and-efficient-international-arbitrationproceedings/#top
and updates to the LCIA Arbitration Rules and the LCIA Mediation
Rules (2020) https://www.lcia.org/lcia-rules-update-2020
Accessed 23rd January 2025.
21. Leveraging Technology for Fair, Effective, and
Efficient International
22. Arbitration Proceedings https://iccwbo.org/news-publications/arbitration-adrrules-and-tools/icc-arbitration-and-adr-commission-report-on-leveragingtechnology-for-fair-effective-and-efficient-international-arbitrationproceedings/#top
and updates to the LCIA Arbitration Rules and the LCIA Mediation
Rules (2020) https://www.lcia.org/lcia-rules-update-2020
Accessed 23rd January 2025.
23. ibid
24. Adedotun Onibokun & Bankole Sodipo (2024).
An Evaluation of Third-Party Funding in Commercial Arbitration. The
Journal of Sustainable Development, Law and Policy. Vol. 15:1.
263-285, https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jsdlp.v15i1.9 Accessed
17th January 2025
25. ibid
26. Adapting to a new era in legal practice: ESG and
technology integration https://www.opus2.com/esg-and-technology-in-arbitration/
Accessed 17th January 2025.
27. Diversification of the Nigerian Economy, https://www.elibrary.imf.org/downloadpdf/journals/002/2021/034/article-A002-
en.pdf Accessed 17th January 2025.
28. Technology and artificial intelligence:
Reengineering arbitration in the new world https://www.ibanet.org/tchnology-and-artificial-intelligence-reengineeringarbitration-in-the-new-world
Accessed 17th January 2025.
29. Technology and artificial intelligence:
Reengineering arbitration in the new world https://www.ibanet.org/tchnology-and-artificial-intelligence-reengineeringarbitration-in-the-new-world
Accessed 17th January 2025.
30. How AI is removing legal obstacles that slow
down business https://www.ft.com/content/6c251704-a17b-43be-b65d-18f3b2f26fb5
Accessed 17th January 2025.
31. SVAMC Publishes Guidelines on the Use of
Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration https://svamc.org/svamc-publishes-guidelines-on-the-use-of-artificialintelligence-in-arbitration/
Accessed 17th January 2025.
32. SVAMC Guidelines on the Use of Artificial
Intelligence in Arbitration https://svamc.org/wp-content/uploads/SVAMC-AI-Guidelines-First-Edition.pdf
Accessed 17th January 2025.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
