Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

P&ID v. Nigeria,Tribunal's Letter Re Nigerian Court Order, May 27, 2016

27 May 2016
Process and Industrial Developments Ltd (P&ID) v. Nigeria Ministry of Petroleum Resources
Tribunal's Letter Re Nigerian Court Order
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Tribunal's Letter Re Nigerian Court Order
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Claimant's counsel
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Country
Print reporter
Document Summary
Tribunal's Letter Re Nigerian Court Order
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Background

This document comprises procedural correspondence from the Presiding Arbitrator on behalf of the Tribunal, addressing the Respondent’s notification that the Federal High Court of Nigeria had issued an order on May 24, 2016, purporting to set aside the Tribunal’s July 17, 2015 award on liability.

Tribunal's Analysis and Directions

The principal issue addressed is the legal effect of the Nigerian court order on the ongoing arbitral proceedings. The Tribunal summarily dismissed the relevance of the local court's intervention, recalling its prior determination in Procedural Order No. 12 that the juridical seat of the arbitration is England. Applying standard principles of international arbitration law, the Tribunal concluded that the Nigerian courts inherently lacked supervisory jurisdiction to set aside an award rendered in an English-seated arbitration.

Consequently, the Tribunal directed that the arbitral proceedings would continue uninterrupted. The Tribunal instructed the Respondent to formally indicate by June 3, 2016, whether it intended to continue participating in the reference, noting that a formal Procedural Order governing the further conduct of the arbitration would subsequently be issued.