Call anytime+234 810 159 9159
Arbitration can be described as a contractual arrangement whereby the parties to a dispute, in order to obtain an effective and less protracted final disposition of the matter involved, select their adjudicator(s) and, by consent, submit their dispute to such selected adjudicator(s) for determination.[1] The decision resulting from arbitration is called an Award. An Award is the result of arbitration, embodying its purpose and design. The importance of an Award cannot be overstated as it represents the core objective of the arbitral process. An arbitral proceeding closely resembles court proceedings, with Awards sharing characteristics similar to court judgments in that they are final and binding, recognized and enforced by the court, and may be set aside by the court. This Article examines the concept of setting aside an Award, the grounds on which an Award may be set aside, the strategic roles of legal counsel in the process, and the Judiciary’s role in setting aside an arbitral Award.
Setting Aside an Arbitral Award
It has been established that an arbitral Award is akin to a court judgment. Just as parties in a court proceeding may be dissatisfied with the judgement of Court and appeal against such judgment for it to be set aside and nullified, parties in an arbitral process have a similar right, though limited by grounds specified in various domestic and international Laws, Regulations and/or Rules governing Arbitration[2] and for the focus of this Article, the Nigerian Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 (AMA)[3]. This comparison is well supported by JCA Rita – Nosakhare Pemu in Bolingo Hotel & Tower Ltd v Dee-v- 8 ltd[4] as follows:
An arbitral Award is a determination on the merits by an arbitration tribunal in an arbitral proceeding. It is analogous to a judgment in a court of law. An Award shall, upon application in writing to the court, be enforced by the court. Once an Award has been given, it qualifies for recognition and enforcement under the relevant and applicable laws or conventions, subject to the right of either party to apply to set aside the award.”
Although an arbitral Award can be set aside, the law imposes stringent grounds that must be met for such an action. This is because an Award is final and binding on the parties in the arbitral proceeding. The principle that underpins the doctrine of finality of an Award is that the parties have selected “Judges” whom they trust will act impartially and independently to conduct the arbitration with fairness and regularity.[5] It must, however, be stressed that while the courts can set aside or refuse to enforce an Award, they cannot inquire into the mode of evaluation of the facts by the Arbitral Tribunal. They can only disturb the Award on technical grounds. This is because the Arbitral Tribunal is the master of the facts.[6]
In Nigeria, to initiate the process of setting aside an Arbitral Award, the aggrieved party must file an application[7] by originating motion[8] within three (3) months of receiving the Award[9]. The application should specify the grounds relied upon as outlined in section 55(3)(a) and (b) of the AMA 2023. The grounds briefly include: incapacity of a party, invalid arbitration agreement, lack of proper notice or fair hearing, Award beyond scope of submission to arbitration, improper composition of Tribunal or procedure, misconduct of the Arbitrator, non-arbitrable dispute, public policy violation.
Strategic Role of the Legal Counsel
The question of legal representation of a party in arbitration proceedings is as important as in proceedings before the ordinary courts. The legal Counsel is expected to handle the application to set aside the Arbitral Award with utmost diligence and caution, as the application will be brought before the applicable High Court. In Nigeria, the detailed process for initiating an application is outlined in the Arbitration Proceeding Rules 2020 in conjunction with the Rules of the applicable State High Court.
It is the duty of Counsel to discourage frivolous attempts to set aside Arbitral Awards, ensuring that only applications grounded in the statutory provision of the AMA 2023, such as procedural unfairness, Arbitrator misconduct, or public policy violations, are pursued. Counsel must meticulously prepare the application, providing clear evidence and legal arguments to justify the grounds for setting aside the Award, while adhering to the strict three-month time limit. Failure to comply with the stipulated time frame renders the action time-barred.[10]
Strategic Role of the Judiciary
According to Section 64 (1) of the AMA 2023, “A court shall not intervene in any matter governed by this Act, except where it is provided in this Act.” Accordingly, in Abuja Environment Protection Board v Mahaj Nigeria Limited[11], it was held that “a Court cannot delve into matters pertaining to Arbitration Awards as if it is an appellate Court, it can only exercise the powers prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.”
The references above do not insinuate that an Arbitral Panel is independent from the Court, as Lord Mustill states: “…on the one hand, the concept of arbitration as a consensual process reinforced by the idea of transnationalism leans against the involvement of the mechanisms of state through the medium of a municipal court. On the other side, there is the plain fact, palatable or not, that it is only a court possessing coercive powers which could rescue the arbitration if it is in danger of foundering”[12]. However, one of the fundamental principles upon which arbitration is founded is judicial non-intervention, and Nigerian Law limits judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings. Nigerian Courts are pro-arbitration, meaning they rarely cancel awards unless there is a clear and proven basis on the grounds.
Therefore, in setting aside Awards, the Courts will only intervene where the grounds relied upon by the aggrieved party have been proved sufficiently and that such grounds will cause or have caused substantial injustice to the applicant[13]. The import being that it may be more difficult to have an Award set aside. It has been argued that this will limit court intervention, prevent frivolous attempts to set aside, and promote finality of Awards.[14] The court will not entertain any matters on their merits or on the ground of error on the face of the Award[15]. Where an Award, or part of it, is set aside, the effect is that it divests the Award or part of it of any legal effect and so renders it unenforceable. The Arbitrator is also deprived of the reference, the import being that the whole of the arbitral process must be recommenced[16].
It is pertinent to note that the AMA 2023 introduces the Award Review Tribunal (ART), which has the power to set aside or uphold an Award rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal. Parties may, in their arbitration agreement, agree to the review of the Award by an ART on any of the set-aside grounds listed in Section 55(3)[17]. If an ART has partially or wholly upheld an Award, the Award can only be set aside by a court on the limited grounds of arbitrability and/or public policy.[18] The ART is to be composed of Arbitrators who shall render their decision (Award) within sixty (60) days of the date of constitution of the Tribunal[19]. A party that is dissatisfied with the decision of the ART may apply to the court to review it[20].
Conclusion
The process of setting aside arbitral Awards in Nigeria, as governed by the AMA 2023, exemplifies the delicate balance between upholding the finality of Arbitral Awards and ensuring justice. Legal Counsel plays a pivotal role in this framework, diligently preparing applications under Section 55 of the AMA 2023 to challenge Awards on grounds such as inter alia: arbitrator misconduct, lack of fair hearing, or public policy violations. Also, the AMA has limited the grounds for setting aside an arbitral Award by excluding the “error on the face of the Award” ground[21], which was relied upon as an omnibus basis to challenge Awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2024 and gave Nigerian Courts the powers to conduct a merit review of the tribunal’s findings.[22] By discouraging frivolous attempts and adhering to the strict three-month timeline, the legal Counsel ensures that only meritorious applications are pursued, safeguarding the integrity of the arbitral process.
The judiciary, adopting a pro-arbitration stance as evidenced in cases like Abuja Environmental Protection Board v. Mahaj Nigeria Limited (2021)[23], intervenes only when statutory grounds are clearly proven, focusing on procedural integrity rather than re-examining the merits of the Award. The role of the Judiciary is therefore meant to protect the sanctity of the arbitral process. The introduction of the Award Review Tribunal under the AMA further enhances efficiency, reducing court backlog while aligning Nigeria with global arbitration standards, such as the UNCITRAL Model Law. Despite these advancements, challenges remain, including the delays caused by applications made to court for reasons like revocation of the arbitration agreement, stay of proceedings, and greater awareness, among other things. Legal Counsel and the Judiciary must continue to unite to uphold arbitration’s autonomy while ensuring justice.
[1] Mike Bamigboye, “Arbitration law and practice in Nigeria: Does National Court involvement undermine the arbitration Process (SSRN,2015), quoted in Mayowa M. Abiru, “Setting aside International Arbitral Awards in Nigeria: Public Policy Considerations” (SSRN) https://ssrn.com/abstract=3715396 accessed 3rd September 2025 at 3:00 pm.
[2] Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2004: UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985) UN Doc. A/40117, annex 1.
[3] Hereinafter referred to as the “AMA 2023”
[4] (2021) LPELR – 54670 (CA).
[5] J. Olakunle Orojo and M. Ayodele Ajomo, “Law and Practice of Arbitration and Conciliation in Nigeria, (Mbeyi and Associates,1999) quoted in Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on the 8th of September.
[6] Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on the 8th of September.
[7] Section 55 (1) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[8] Section 2 Arbitration Proceeding Rules 2020 in the third schedule of the Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[9] Section 55(4) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[10] Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on the 9th of September: Section 55(4) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[11] (2021) LPELR – 55590 (CA).
[12] Coppee Levalin NV v Ken- Ren Fertilizers and Chemicals (1994) 2 Lloyd’s Rep 109 quoted in Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on the 9th of September 2025.
[13] Section 55(5) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[14] Elizabeth Oger- Gross and Tolu Obamuroh, “New Arbitration Regime Comes into Force in Nigeria” ( June 21, 2023) https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/new-arbitration-regime-comes-force-nigeria accessed 9TH September,2025.
[15] Section 55(2) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[16] Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on 9th September,2025.
[17] Section 56(1) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[18] Section 26(9) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[19] Section 56(4) (a) and (6) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[20] Section 56(8) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023: Moneke E., Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings under Nigeria’s arbitration legislation: supportive or Disruptive? https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk accessed on 9th September,2025.
[21] Section 55(2) Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
[22] Stanley U. Nweke-eze, ‘Safeguarding the Sanctity of Arbitral Awards under Nigerian Law’. Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Journal of Commercial and Property Law [2024] vol.11(2) pg. 120&121.
[23] LPELR- 55590 (CA).
Written by Eunice Jatau for The Trusted Advisors
Email us: info@cms.trustedadvisorslaw.com