Guerrilla Tactics in Arbitration Practice in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis of the Legal and Institutional Framework

Prof. Uwakwe Abugu; Olusola Sefeoluwa Ephraim-oluwanuga

doi:10.56201/JLGP.vol.11.no4.2026.pg65.80

📄 Download Paper

Guerrilla Tactics in Arbitration Practice in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis of the Legal and Institutional Framework

Prof. Uwakwe Abugu, Olusola Sefeoluwa Ephraim-oluwanuga

Abstract

Arbitration has become an essential mechanism for resolving domestic and international commercial disputes due to its flexibility, confidentiality, party autonomy, and procedural efficiency. In Nigeria, the importance of arbitration as a means of promoting commercial certainty and investment protection has been reinforced by the enactment of the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 , which replaced the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1988 and introduced reforms consistent with international arbitration standards, particularly the UNCITRAL Model Law. Despite these developments, arbitral proceedings remain susceptible to procedural abuses commonly described as guerrilla tactics. Guerrilla tactics involve deliberate attempts by parties or their representatives to obstruct, delay, or manipulate arbitration proceedings for strategic advantage. These practices may include frivolous challenges to arbitrators, excessive procedural applications, jurisdictional objections, non- compliance with tribunal orders, and efforts to frustrate the enforcement of arbitral awards. While procedural safeguards are necessary to protect fairness and due process, their misuse threatens the efficiency, credibility, and finality of arbitration. This article critically examines Nigeria’s legal and institutional framework for addressing guerrilla tactics in arbitration, with particular emphasis on the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023. It evaluates provisions relating to arbitrator challenges, tribunal powers, interim measures, enforcement mechanisms, and judicial support for arbitration, while also considering professional ethics, arbitration institutions, and international standards under the UNCITRAL framework. The article argues that legislative reform alone cannot effectively eliminate procedural abuse. Combating guerrilla tactics requires proactive tribunal management, ethical compliance by practitioners, institutional oversight, effective cost sanctions, and a balanced judicial approach. It concludes that Nigeria’s modern arbitration regime provides a strong foundation for efficient dispute resolution, but its effectiveness depends on consistent enforcement of safeguards that preserve the integrity and finality of arbitral proceedings.

Keywords

ArbitrationGuerrilla TacticsArbitration and Mediation Act 2023ADRNigeriaProfessional EthicsUNCITRAL Model Law.

References

Ahuja N, Taming the Guerrilla in International Commercial Arbitration: Levelling the Playing Field (Springer 2022). Ahuja N, ‘The Nature of Guerrilla Tactics in International Arbitration’ in Navin Ahuja, Taming the Guerrilla in International Commercial Arbitration: Levelling the Playing Field (Springer 2022) 65. Architects (Registration, Etc.) Act 2004 (Cap A19, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004). Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023. Blackaby N, Partasides C, Redfern A and Hunter M, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration (7th edn, Oxford University Press 2023). Born GB, International Commercial Arbitration (3rd edn, Kluwer Law International 2021). Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention, 1958). Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). Court of Appeal Rules 2021. Ekpenisi C, Aidonojie PA, Antai GO, Akinsulore A, Okonji C and John DJ, ‘Legal Issues Concerning the Role of Arbitration in Resolving Corporate Governance Dispute in Nigeria’ (2024) 10(1) NIU Journal of Legal Studies 5. Eric S, ‘The ICC Arbitration Rules and the UNCITRAL Model Law’ (1993) 9(3) Arbitration International 234. Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019. Gaillard E, ‘Abuse of Process in International Arbitration’ (2017) ICSID Review 1. Gaillard E and Savage J , Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration (Kluwer Law International 1999). High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019. Hwang M, ‘Why is There Still Resistance to Arbitration in Asia?’ in G Aksen and B Robert , Global Reflections on International Law, Commerce and Dispute Resolution (ICC Publishing 2005) 401. International Bar Association, IBA Guidelines on Party Representation in International Arbitration (2013). International Chamber of Commerce, ICC Arbitration and ADR Commission Report on Construction Industry Arbitration (2019). International Chamber of Commerce, ICC Arbitration Rules (2026). International Centre for Dispute Resolution, ICDR International Dispute Resolution Procedures (2021). Kekere AI and Matthew G, ‘A Critique of the Concept of Limitation Period under the Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023’ (2024) 7(1) Redeemer’s University Nigeria Faculty of Law Journal 73. Klaus PB, Private Dispute Resolution in International Business: Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration (3rd revised edn, Kluwer Law International 2015). Lagos Court of Arbitration, Lagos Court of Arbitration Rules (2013). Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse, History and Development of the LMDC. Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse, Online Dispute Resolution Guidelines (2021). Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse Law 2007. Legal Practitioners Act 2004 (Cap L11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004). Lew JDM, Mistelis LA and Kröll S, Comparative International Commercial Arbitration (Kluwer Law International 2003). London Court of International Arbitration, LCIA Arbitration Rules (2020). Madukolu v Nkemdilim [1962] 2 SCNLR 341. JLGP JLGP E-ISSN 2579-051X McLachlan C, Shore L and Weiniger M, International Investment Arbitration: Substantive Principles (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2017). Moore CW, The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict (4th edn, Jossey-Bass 2014). MV Lupex v Nigerian Overseas Chartering and Shipping Ltd (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt 844) 469 (SC). Nigerian Cooperative Societies Act (Cap N98, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004). Nigerian Law School Act 1962 (Cap N83, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004). Olatawura OO, ‘Nigeria’s Appellate Courts, Arbitration and Extra-Legal Jurisdiction: Facts, Problems, and Solutions’ (2023) 28(1) Arbitration International 63. Redfern A, Hunter M, Blackaby N and Partasides C, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration (7th edn, Oxford University Press 2023). Rogers CA, ‘Fit and Function in Legal Ethics: Developing a Code of Conduct for International Arbitration’ (2002) 23 Michigan Journal of International Law 341. Rogers CA, ‘Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration’ (2006) 54 Kansas Law Review 1301. Rosenne S, The Law and Practice of the International Court 1920–2015 (5th edn, Brill Nijhoff 2016). Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023. Singh OP, ‘Understanding Guerrilla Tactics in International Arbitration’ (2021) 3(2) Christ University Law Journal 69. Supreme Court Rules 2024. Trade Disputes Act (Cap T8, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004). UBA Plc v Trident Consulting Ltd (2023) LPELR-60643(SC). United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 with Amendments as Adopted in 2006 (United Nations 2008). van den Berg AJ, The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958: Towards a Uniform Judicial Interpretation (Kluwer Law International 1981).

Guerrilla Tactics in Arbitration Practice in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis of the Legal and Institutional Framework

Abstract

Keywords

References

More Articles from JOURNAL OF LAW AND GLOBAL POLICY