Content area
Full Text
(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)
* Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Nigeria; partner, Ikeyi & Arifayan.
** Professor of law, Faculty of Law, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria (currently on leave of absence at the National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria).
The authors are grateful to Prof RACE Achara and Prof George Nnona for their useful comments on the draft of this article. They are also grateful to Sam Orji of Ikeyi & Arifayan for his research assistance.
INTRODUCTION
Before 1988, there was no unified legal framework in Nigeria for the settlement of commercial disputes by arbitration or conciliation. Various states in the country had their respective legislation, which governed the practice of commercial arbitration within those states. Examples of such legislation were the Arbitration Law of Lagos State,1the Arbitration Law of former Eastern Region,2the Arbitration Law of Kano State3and the Arbitration Law of Cross River State.4One common feature of the various state arbitration laws was that they all derived from the Arbitration Ordinance of 19145(the Arbitration Ordinance), which was promulgated under British colonial rule.
However, for states that did not promulgate an arbitration statute before 1988, commercial arbitration was governed by the Arbitration Ordinance and the common law rules relating to arbitration as propounded by the courts in England.
In 1988, the Federal Military Government promulgated the Arbitration and Conciliation Decree No 11 of 1988 (the Arbitration Decree). The aim of the Arbitration Decree was to provide a unified legal framework for the fair and efficient settlement by arbitration of commercial disputes throughout the federation. The decree, which applied throughout the Federation of Nigeria,6covered domestic and international commercial arbitration. It did not however affect the application of any law in force by virtue of which any particular dispute may be submitted to arbitration only in accordance with the provisions of that law.7While it could be argued that this provision saved the application of the various state arbitration laws to arbitration proceedings conducted within the respective states, a more valid argument would appear to be that the provision saved the application of specific legislation or any rule of law by which certain disputes, though of a commercial...