THE ROLE OF ARBITRATION IN RESOLVING COMMERCIAL DISPUTES: A STUDY OF NIGERIAN COURTS ATTITUDES TOWARDS ARBITRARY AWARDS

Abstract

Commercial contracts are legally binding agreements defining the expectations, rights, and obligations of parties in business transactions, including remedies for breach. Disputes arising from such contracts may be resolved through litigation, arbitration, or alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Litigation occurs in court, involving lawsuits, evidence presentation, and judicial rulings. Arbitration, by contrast, is a consensual process in which parties submit disputes to an agreed arbitrator or tribunal, and any resulting award is binding once accepted. ADR methods, such as mediation and conciliation, facilitates amicable settlements without legally binding decisions. With globalization and cross-border commercial activities expanding, relationships among businesses, investors, and states have become more complex. This complexity extends to dispute resolution and enforcement of decisions. Although arbitration is widely used for international commercial disputes, its effectiveness often depends on judicial recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. In other words, award creditors may rely on courts to secure the benefits of arbitration outcomes. This article examines arbitration’s role in addressing increasingly intricate, transnational commercial transactions and evaluates how Nigerian courts enforce arbitral awards. It also considers the judiciary’s attitude toward arbitration, assessing whether Nigeria provides a supportive environment for enforcing decisions that arise from these alternative dispute processes.