CORAM

---

S M.A. BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

M.E. OGUNDARE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

U. MOHAMMED, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

A.I. KATSINA-ALU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

A.O. EJIWUNMI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

A.SAVOIA LIMITED

APPELLANTS 

---

A. O. SONUBI

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

ARBITRATION – JURISDICTION OF COURT

 

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant applied to set aside the award made by an arbitrator on grounds of misconduct. The high court found that there was no misconduct and that the arbitrator gave the award based on the evidence before him but referred one of the awards back to the arbitrator. The court of appeal dismissed the appeal but awarded the sum referred back to the arbitrator.

 

 

---

HELD

---

The court dismissed the appeal but held that the court of appeal was wrong to have made the award.

 

 

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the Court of Appeal was right to uphold the judgment of the High Court on the ground that the Arbitrator did not legally misconduct himself by employing his skill, and experience in place of evidence before him?

Whether the Court of Appeal should not have set aside the judgment of the High Court on the ground that the teamed Judge erred in ruling that the Arbitrator did not contravene the rules of natural justice?

 

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

GROUND ON WHICH THE COURT MAY SET ASIDE AN ARBITRAL AWARD

---

Section 12(2) of the Arbitration Law Cap. 10, Laws of Lagos State, 1973 applicable to this case, empowered the court to set aside an award where the arbitrator had misconducted himself or the award had been improperly procured- Ogundare J.S.C J.S.C.

 

 

---

CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAY CONSTITUTE MISCONDUCT UNDER WHICH AN ARBITRAL AWARD MAY BE SET ASIDE

---

CONDUCT THAT WOULD AMOUNT TO MISCONDUCT WITHIN THE LAW ARE:

(1) Where the arbitrator fails to comply with the terms, express or implied, of the arbitration agreement;

(2) Where, even if the arbitrator complies with the terms of the arbitration agreement, the arbitrator makes an award which on grounds of public policy ought not to be enforced,

(3) Where the arbitrator has been bribed or corrupted,

(4) Technical misconduct, such as where the arbitrator makes a mistake as to the scope of the authority conferred by the agreement of reference. This, however, does not mean that every irregularity of procedure amounts to misconduct;

(5) Where the arbitrator or umpire fails to decide all the matters, which were referred to him;

(6)  Where the arbitrator or umpire has breached the rules of natural justice.

(7)  If the arbitrator or umpire has failed to act fairly towards both parties, as for example:-

(a)  by hearing one party but refusing to hear the other; or

(b)  by deciding the case on a point not put by the parties. – Ogundare J.S.C

 

 

---

WHETHER THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO DETERMINE ANY MATTER, THE SUBJECT OF AN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

---

Under Section 11 and 12 of the Arbitration Law of Lagos State, the court’s jurisdiction to interfere with the award of an arbitrator is limited to setting aside an award or remitting a matter to the arbitrator for reconsideration. The court has no jurisdiction to determine any matter, the subject of an arbitration proceedings- Ogundare J.S.C

 

 

---

CASES CITED

---

Taylor Woodrow (Nig) Ltd vs. Suddeentshe Etna- Werlk GMBH (1993) 4 NWLR 127

 

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

The Arbitration Law of Lagos State

 

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT