Representation at Arbitration Proceedings compared to Litigation – The Recent Trend in Shell v FIRS

The thesis of this article is the recent developments in Nigerian case law, which are inimically influencing arbitration law and practice. Taking into account the interdependent yet dichotomous relationship between public dispute resolution system through the courts and private dispute resolution systems of which arbitration is primus, there is a need to analytically and appropriately position arbitration proceedings - insisting that arbitration as proceedings is ‘sui generis’ of itself. It is not a mere replica of public dispute resolution systems, typical of state machinery. This article seeks to examine modern international best practice and law in arbitration, trace the current judicial trends emanating from the increasingly notorious Supreme Court decision in Okafor v Nweke1 and to critique its ratio while analysing its precedential effect on the decision of the Court of Appeal in Shell v Fed Inland Rev Service. In the final analysis there is need for a coherent approach to parties’ right to representation at arbitration and not a wholesale transplant of approach from litigation to arbitration in decisions affecting both domestic and international arbitration.