LEGAL PRINCIPLE: ARBITRATION LAW – Arbitration and Courts Interaction – Power of Court Limited to Setting Aside or Remitting Award
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Under sections 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 arbitration proceedings.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"Under sections 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."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
This reiterates Principle 464 with emphasis. Court jurisdiction over arbitration is supervisory, not appellate or original. Courts can only: (1) set aside awards (for misconduct, public policy violations, jurisdictional excess); (2) remit matters to arbitrators (for reconsideration of specific issues). Courts cannot: decide the arbitrated dispute themselves, substitute their decision for the arbitrator’s, rehear evidence, or determine substantive matters referred to arbitration. This limitation serves: respecting arbitration as alternative forum, maintaining arbitration’s efficiency and finality, preventing judicial encroachment on consensual dispute resolution, and honoring parties’ choice to arbitrate. Even when courts set aside awards: they typically remit to arbitrator rather than deciding themselves, allowing arbitration process to continue, and respecting the arbitral forum. “No jurisdiction to determine” is absolute—courts lack power to decide arbitrated matters, even if they believe the arbitrator erred, or the outcome seems unjust. This strict limitation maintains arbitration’s distinctive character separate from litigation.