{"id":611,"date":"2021-08-02T12:52:56","date_gmt":"2021-08-02T12:52:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.nicarb.org\/?p=611"},"modified":"2021-08-02T12:52:56","modified_gmt":"2021-08-02T12:52:56","slug":"adr-developments-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.nicarb.org\/index.php\/2021\/08\/02\/adr-developments-2\/","title":{"rendered":"ADR DEVELOPMENTS"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

BROUGHT TO YOU WEEKLY BY THE<\/strong> NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED\u00a0ARBITRATORS.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Editor: Shola Oshodi-John, AICMC, FCArb\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recent Developments\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

REPORT ON THE NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ARBITRATORS (NICArb\u2019s)\u00a02021 AfCFTA Roundtable\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Nigerian Institute of Chartered Arbitrators (NICArb) in collaboration with The National Action \u00a0Committee for African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA) and The Nigerian Chambers of \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Commerce Dispute Resolution Center (NCCDRC) recently concluded a roundtable themed \u2018AfCFTA \u00a0AND NON-STATE PARTIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR TRADE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION\u201d on \u00a0Friday, 30th <\/sup>July, 2021.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The roundtable which commenced at 10am was opened by the Registrar\/CEO of NICArb, Mrs. Shola \u00a0Oshodi John FCArb, who welcomed and introduced members of the panel (resource persons and \u00a0discussants).\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The roundtable was brilliantly moderated by Mrs. Foluke Akinmoladun FCArb.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first resource person Prof. Jonathan Aremu during the AfCFTA-roundtable event spoke on the \u00a0implications for Trade under AfCFTA giving detailed insights into the topic.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second resource person Dr. Ken Ukaoha spoke about the Implications under Dispute \u00a0Resolutions\/legal issues.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The third resource person Mr. Nathan Searle gave an Overview on the theme of the event.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fourth resource person Dr. Fatima Bello spoke about the Implementation of AfCFTA and \u00a0provision of remedial measures to non-state parties amongst others.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first discussant Otunba Pedro highlighted some of the insights on the topic discussed by other \u00a0speakers and then discussed in-depth on Trade under AfCFTA.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second discussant Professor Muhammed Ladan captured the topical areas around \u00a0Domestication of AfCFTA giving very authoritative clarifications on AfCFTA, its protocols and how to \u00a0move both the Nigerian executive and legislative arms of government to set in motion and fast track \u00a0AfCFTA\u2019s domestication in Nigeria.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The third discussant Mrs Shola Oshodi-John \u2013 Registrar\/CEO, Nigerian Institute of Chartered \u00a0Arbitrators went further to speak on the Role of Arbitral\/ADR Institutions under AfCFTA.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The round table discussion ended with an insightful engagement between the participants and the \u00a0panelists at the question and answer session and the Registrar\/CEO gave the closing remarks.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A recorded number of over 400 participants registered for this very eventful roundtable. Kindly stayed tuned for more of NICArb\u2019s exceptional and insightful events.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Source: <\/strong>Contribution by NICArb\u2019s research team<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

READ YOUR CONTRACT: IT MAY COST YOU YOUR ARBITRATION AWARD\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Imagine receiving an arbitration award in favor of your client. You move to confirm the award, and the\u00a0 award is vacated because the parties failed to mediate prior to arbitration. That is exactly what\u00a0 happened in Burke v. Roberson<\/em>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In December 2020, the First Court of Appeals in Houston affirmed the vacatur of an arbitration award\u00a0 because a condition precedent to arbitration under the governing contract \u2013 i.e., mediation \u2013 was not\u00a0 satisfied or waived by the parties prior to arbitration. In affirming the vacatur, the court held that the\u00a0 dispute was never properly before the arbitrator and that the arbitrator therefore exceeded his\u00a0 powers in issuing the award.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Texas law favors arbitration, and the construction industry is no exception in the pursuit of finality and\u00a0 findings generally not susceptible to challenge. An arbitration award \u201chas the same effect as a\u00a0 judgment of a court of last resort,\u201d thus \u201call reasonable presumptions are indulged in its favor\u201d (see\u00a0 Port Arthur Steam Energy LP v. Oxbow Calcining LLC<\/em>). Under the Texas Arbitration Act, a trial court\u00a0 shall <\/em>confirm an arbitration award \u201cunless grounds are offered for vacating\u201d the award. The exclusive <\/em>grounds for vacating an arbitration award are set forth in Section 171.088, the relevant ground in\u00a0 Burke <\/em>being when an arbitrator exceeds his or her powers. An arbitrator exceeds his or her powers\u00a0 \u201cby deciding a matter not properly before\u201d them.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Burke, <\/em>the agreement at issue stated: \u201cany controversy which touches or concerns [the\u00a0 Agreement] shall <\/em>be resolved by mediation, and if such mediation is unable to resolve the\u00a0 controversy, then exclusively by binding arbitration.\u201d The court held this conditional language\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

established mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration. Unless and until the parties mediated,\u00a0 the court reasoned that the controversy was not properly before the arbitrator. Notably, the court was\u00a0 not sympathetic to the appellant\u2019s repeated attempts to mediate with appellees prior to arbitration\u00a0 and held such \u201cinaction\u201d was not a waiver of their right to mediate.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While it was a straightforward decision and premised on the very terms the parties agreed to in the\u00a0 governing contract, the court\u2019s decision in Burke <\/em>is every client\u2019s nightmare that affects all parties\u00a0 equally \u2013 i.e., the party attempting to confirm an arbitration award. The decision suggests a potential\u00a0 broadening of what courts consider an arbitrator exceeding his or her powers \u2013 and yet another basis\u00a0 upon which a seemingly final arbitration award can be vacated.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To avoid the result in Burke <\/em>when faced with a similar agreement, the parties should either mediate\u00a0 as required under the agreement or enter an agreed waiver of mediation. The parties can always\u00a0 mediate later should they decide to do so.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Source: <\/strong>Contribution by NICArb\u2019s research team\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

SINGAPORE \u2014 FREE MEDISTION SESSIONS FOR WEDDING COUPLES AND THEIR VENDORS AFFECTED BY COVID-19 RESTRICTIONS IN SINGAPORE HAVE BEEN EXTENDED TILL THE END OF SEPTEMBER<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This will facilitate the settlement of disputes between parties over wedding events arising from \u00a0tightened restrictions under the current heightened alert phase, which lasts till Aug 18, the Ministry of \u00a0Law (MinLaw) said on Thursday (July 29).\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rules introduced to curb the spread of Covid-19 have reduced the permissible capacity for \u00a0wedding solemnizations and receptions, MinLaw said.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Marriage solemnizations now have a limit of 100 participants with pre-event testing, and 50 \u00a0individuals without testing \u2014 down from the 250 people previously allowed with pre-event testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The meditation programme, which was first introduced by MinLaw on July 12 to cover events held \u00a0between May 8 and July 31 this year, will now be extended to cover weddings scheduled between \u00a0July 31 and Sept 30. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To apply for the programme, eligible parties may submit their request for mediation and a copy of the \u00a0contract to MinLaw by Oct 31. The previous deadline was Sept 10.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fall in Singapore marriages, divorces in 2020 amid Covid-19 restrictions, uncertainty MinLaw will aim to hold the mediation within two weeks of both parties consenting. A \u201cneutral, trained mediator\u201d will facilitate the mediation \u2014 generally conducted virtually \u2014 in a \u201cnon adversarial and confidential setting\u201d.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mediator will help parties work towards a mutually acceptable solution.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ministry said it recognises that Covid-19 regulations have had a significant impact on the \u00a0wedding industry including wedding couples and vendors.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMinLaw strongly encourages eligible parties to consider mediation, participate in the programme with \u00a0an open mind, and be receptive to working out a mutually acceptable solution,\u201d it added.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Source: <\/strong>Contribution by NICArb\u2019s research team\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WHY ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IS USEFUL FOR BUSINESS CONFLICTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To read more on this news, kindly visit our blog by clicking on the link\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NICArb\u2019s TOP NEWS<\/a><\/blockquote>