Abstract
The English court’s decision, which was published last year on 23 October, is described not merely as precedential but as historic in its impact. This decision is impactful not merely because it released the Nigerian state (the respondent in the arbitral award that was set aside by the English court) from the burden of paying a lion’s share of its forex reserves to a little known offshore entity, but also because this is perhaps the first case where suspicions about abusive procedural tactics and corruption during the arbitral proceedings became a self-sufficient ground to set aside a similar international arbitral award. This article uses the almost detective story that unfolded in this case as an opportunity to address broader issues of public policy, legal ethics and corruption in major international cases, to challenge the traditional understanding of adversarial proceedings and to address other problems that directly implicate the future of arbitration as a means of resolving investment disputes. These issues are also quite relevant for Russia considering the impending legal outcome in the long-running Yukos arbitration.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.