Introduction.

It’s a matter of public record that the Federal Republic of Nigeria’s assets have been attached to enforce an arbitral award issued on 26 March 2021 by a UK tribunal. The circumstances leading to this are widely known and do not require further explanation. We have covered the case details in our previous instalment, “How the Concept of Attribution Applies in International Arbitration.”

In this piece, we explore the options available to the Federal Republic of Nigeria if she desires to resist recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award under the New York Convention of 1958. The New York Convention, a pivotal instrument in international arbitration, holds substantial influence over recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, particularly in cases with cross-border implications.

What has happened?

Since obtaining the arbitral award, Fucheng has aggressively pursued global enforcement actions against Nigeria’s assets. This is evident in its successful attempts to ground three presidential jets in Europe and its plans to seize assets in the UK, the US, and six other countries, including Belgium, Canada, France, Singapore, and the British Virgin Islands.

Other assets, such as landed properties belonging to the Federal Government of Nigeria, have also been confiscated. Fucheng is on the precipice of taking advantage of the £20 million cost awarded in favour of Nigeria against P&ID by a United Kingdom appeal court.

The reason for the above development is clear to practitioners. In simple terms, it’s what we would like to call “the dark side of arbitration” or any adjudicatory process where an award debtor, such as Nigeria in this case, refuses to comply with the terms of the award. We are witnessing a by-product of Fucheng’s enforcement proceedings instituted in various jurisdictions. Through these proceedings, Fucheng aims to satisfy the award sum of $70,000,000 (Seventy Million United States Dollars) contained in the arbitral award.