The recent decision of the Federal High Court involving FBN Quest Trustees Limited, the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration, and the personal cost sanction imposed on Norrison Quakers have once again brought to the forefront one of the biggest challenges facing arbitration in Nigeria: procedural resistance and excessive judicial interruption of arbitral proceedings.
Beyond the legal significance of the judgment, the case exposes deeper issues within dispute resolution practice in Nigeria: delays in arbitral administration, allegations of procedural irregularity, multiplicity of proceedings, lack of transparency in arbitral processes, and the tactical use of litigation to frustrate arbitration.
In the ruling, Justice Akintayo Aluko described the suit as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of court process. The court also fined the parties and their counsel 2 million naira for attempting to stop an arbitration process that had already been backed by earlier court decisions.
At the center of the matter was the appointment of an arbitrator by the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (RCICAL). Instead of allowing the arbitration to continue, fresh suits and applications were filed in court, leading to more delays and more legal expenses.
These are precisely the kinds of problems All-Arbitrates is designed to solve. Our solution is simple. In the case of a sole arbitrator, one party chooses, the other party can agree or reject. If a party rejects, it would be the turn of the rejecting party to choose another arbitrator for the other party to accept or reject. If there is still no agreement, the system will throw up a neutral arbitrator for both. Simple solution for appointment. In many cases, disputes arise not because arbitration clauses are invalid, but because parties challenge: the appointment of arbitrators, procedural timelines, institutional authority, or the legitimacy of administrative actions taken during the arbitral process.
All-Arbitrates helps move arbitration and mediation processes online from beginning to end. Rather than parties running from one court to another, every stage of the dispute resolution process can be handled in one secure digital space.
Documents, notices, hearing dates, arbitrator appointments, and communications are properly recorded and accessible to all parties involved. This reduces confusion, unnecessary applications, and claims of bad faith.
Another important part of the judgment was the court’s recognition of the legal protection given to arbitral institutions under the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023. This further strengthens confidence in arbitration as a reliable alternative to lengthy court battles.
For businesses, financial institutions, and even legal practitioners, the message is becoming clearer, dispute resolution is gradually moving toward technology-driven systems that are more efficient, transparent, and easier to manage.
Cases like this show why Nigeria’s legal and business environment needs modern dispute resolution tools. Platforms like All-Arbitrates are not just introducing technology into arbitration; they are helping reduce delay, cost, and abuse of process while making justice more accessible and efficient.