Courts’ Attitude Towards Annulment of New York Convention Arbitral Awards: An Evaluation of English and Nigerian Courts’ Approach

Abstract

A party to arbitration has the right to challenge an award if the party so chooses. A challenge may seek to vacate (annul or set aside), suspend, or remit the award to the arbitrator due to an error on the face of the award or due to an injustice in its rendering. The scheme for challenging an award is a vital aspect of the arbitration process and serves as a safeguard against corruption, arbitrariness, and bias, while also providing a mechanism for balancing the arbitral process. What is more critical in the annulment scheme, however, is the courts’ attitude toward a challenge to an award.This article discussesthe policy issuesthat English courts weigh when considering whether to annul an award. Additionally, it examines the question of annulment of awards on legal grounds, using English case law to indicate the approach Nigerian courts may take when asked to annul an award on the basis that the arbitrator’s ruling on a legal point is clearly erroneous. It contends and concludes that Nigerian courts’ pragmatic attitude to annulment claims based on arbitrator’s misconduct and/or improper ordering of arbitral procedures or awards will increase the efficacy of international arbitration in Nigeria, just as it does in England.