Enforcement of international arbitral awards in developing and developed countries

: A comparative study between the OHADA Regime and the United Kingdom

Abstract

International arbitration has significantly developed and expanded over the years in light
of the high volume of cross-border commercial contracts containing arbitration clauses.
This has led to a substantial growth of arbitrations worldwide, specifically in Sub-Saharan
Africa, which is recognized as one of the fastest-growing regions worldwide. This growth
has led to commercial disputes and, consequently, the establishment of the Organization
for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (hereinafter OHADA), as well as the need
to resort to alternative dispute mechanisms such as arbitration.
This thesis aims to assess the enforceability of arbitral awards in developing and
developed countries through a comparative study, with a special focus on the OHADA and
the UK regime.
The study consisted of two phases: doctrinal and mixed-methods research, with the aim
to critically examine what lessons the OHADA regime can draw on English law.
The first phase involves the use of secondary sources. Analysis of the findings helped
establish a new theory to implement in the OHADA region: anti-suit injunctions. The
findings revealed that incorporating the common law concept into the OHADA civil law
system could potentially yield substantial benefits. This would help streamline the
arbitration proceedings within the OHADA framework, thereby mitigating the risk of dilatory
practices.
The second phase involves empirical methods through semi-structured interviews and
survey questionnaires. The findings demonstrate that while the 2017 reform of the OHADA
arbitration framework introduced commendable innovations, the OHADA legislator missed
the opportunity to address unresolved issues and inconsistencies within the OHADA texts.
Although the revised Uniform Act on Arbitration appears to meet international standards
and best practices, it is submitted that certain provisions in the OHADA Treaty and the
CCJA rules contradict substantial elements of the Act. These articles are analysed through
a comparative perspective in the study. Thus, it is hoped that the legislator takes the
necessary steps to amend the relevant provisions in a forthcoming reform so as to aspire
to achieve the OHADA objectives of harmonization and further promote legal certainty in
the realm of arbitration.
The main beneficiaries of this study are the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration, the
OHADA institutions, practitioners, experts, academics and students.

Date of Award	Jul 2023
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	Coventry University
Supervisor	Margaret Liu (Supervisor) & Stuart MacLennan (Supervisor)