THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN RESOLVING DISPUTES OR CONFLICTS IN THE NIGERIAN COURT AND THE ROLE OF LAGOS STATE MULTI-DOOR COURT HOUSE AS A CASE STUDY

 

Chukwuemeka A. Nnabuife ACIS

INTRODUCTION

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has emerged as a pivotal mechanism for resolving disputes in Nigeria, offering a faster, less adversarial, and more cost-effective alternative to traditional litigation. In a country where the judicial system is often plagued by delays, congestion, and procedural complexities, ADR provides a vital supplement to the courts, enhancing access to justice and fostering amicable resolutions. The Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse (LMDC), established in 2002 as Africa’s first court-connected ADR center, serves as a pioneering case study in this regard. This examines the significance of ADR in the Nigerian judicial landscape, with a focus on the LMDC’s role, supported by Nigerian and international statutory and judicial authorities. 

DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to a range of processes—including negotiation, mediation, arbitration, conciliation, and hybrid mechanisms—designed to resolve disputes outside traditional courtroom litigation. In Nigeria, where the judicial system faces chronic challenges such as case backlogs, prolonged delays, and high costs, ADR has emerged as a transformative tool for enhancing access to justice and promoting efficient dispute resolution. The Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse (LMDC), established in 2002, stands as a pioneering model of court-connected ADR in Africa, offering a practical case study of its application and impact. 

UNDERSTANDING ADR: MECHANISMS AND PRINCIPLES

ADR encompasses several methods, each with distinct features suited to different disputes:

Negotiation: A voluntary, informal process where parties directly resolve disputes without a third-party facilitator. For example, in commercial disputes over contract terms, Nigerian businesses often negotiate to avoid litigation costs (Onyema, 2013) [1].

Mediation: A facilitated process where a neutral mediator assists parties in reaching a mutually acceptable settlement. In family disputes, such as custody battles, mediation preserves relationships, as seen in cases handled by the LMDC (Umegbolu, 2019) [2].

Arbitration: A binding process where an arbitrator renders a decision after hearing both sides. In Tulip Nigeria Ltd. v. Noleggioe Transport Maritime S.A.S. (2011) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1237), the Nigerian Court of Appeal upheld an arbitral award, affirming arbitration’s enforceability under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) 1988 (Cap A18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004) [3]. 

Conciliation: Similar to mediation but with a more active conciliator proposing solutions. This is less common in Nigeria but recognized under the ACA 1988. 

Hybrid Processes: Combinations like med-arb (mediation followed by arbitration) offer flexibility, as utilized by the LMDC in complex commercial disputes (LMDC Annual Report, 2022) [4]. ADR’s core principles—confidentiality, party autonomy, speed, and cost-effectiveness contrast with litigation’s adversarial nature. The ACA 1988, Nigeria’s primary ADR statute, aligns with the UNCITRAL Model Law 1985, ensuring arbitral awards are enforceable domestically and internationally under the New York Convention 1958 (Akinwumi, 2021) [5]. Internationally, the English Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 1996 and the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act 1925 provide comparative frameworks emphasizing ADR’s global acceptance.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ADR IN NIGERIA

Nigeria’s judicial system, rooted in its colonial history, has historically favoured litigation as the primary mode of dispute resolution. However, the inefficiencies of this system such as prolonged case durations averaging 4–10 years, overcrowded dockets, and high costs have undermined public confidence and access to justice (Onyema, 2017) [6]. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) [7], under Section 19(d), recognizes negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and adjudication as legitimate means of resolving disputes, albeit in the context of international relations. Nigerian courts have extended this principle to domestic disputes, reflecting a growing acceptance of ADR (Agbede, 2020) [8].

ADR’s significance lies in its ability to address these systemic challenges. It offers flexibility, confidentiality, and party autonomy, allowing disputants to tailor resolutions to their needs rather than endure rigid courtroom procedures. Arbitration and mediation, the most widely used ADR methods in Nigeria, are governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) 1988 (Cap A18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004) [9], which domesticates the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law of 1985. This statute provides a legal framework for enforceable arbitral awards, aligning Nigeria with international standards such as the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958, to which Nigeria is a signatory.

Judicial authorities further underscore ADR’s importance. In Eperokun v. University of Lagos (1986) NWLR (Pt. 152) [10], the Nigerian Supreme Court emphasized the value of amicable settlements over protracted litigation. Similarly, the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019, Order 28, mandates referral of cases to ADR mechanisms like the LMDC when pleadings close, reflecting a judicial policy to decongest courts and expedite justice delivery (High Court of Lagos State, 2019) [11]. 

Internationally, the English Civil Procedure Rules 1999, inspired by Lord Woolf’s reforms, serve as a model for Lagos State’s approach, encouraging judges to promote ADR as part of case management (Woolf, 1996) [12].

ADR also preserves relationships, a critical factor in Nigeria’s commercial hub, Lagos, where businesses seek to maintain partnerships despite disputes. Unlike litigation’s win-lose outcomes, mediation often results in win-win solutions, reducing emotional and financial costs (Odibo, 2016) [13]. Statistical evidence highlights ADR’s efficacy: while traditional court cases languish for years, the LMDC resolves disputes in 3–5 months on average (Achere, 2020) [14].

THE ROLE OF THE LAGOS STATE MULTI-DOOR COURTHOUSE

The LMDC, established on June 11, 2002, through a public-private partnership between the Lagos State Judiciary and the Negotiation and Conflict Management Group (NCMG), exemplifies ADR’s transformative potential in Nigeria. Enacted under the Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse Law 2007 (amended 2015) [15], the LMDC operates as a court-connected ADR center offering mediation, arbitration, and other hybrid processes (LMDC Law, 2007). Its objectives, outlined in Section 29, include enhancing access to justice, minimizing delays, and promoting ADR as a focal point for dispute resolution in Lagos State.

The LMDC’s structure integrates with the formal judicial system, allowing cases to enter via court referrals or voluntary “walk-ins.” Court-referred cases are screened by the High Court Registry under Order 28 of the Lagos Rules, while walk-ins enable direct access for citizens (High Court of Lagos State, 2019). Upon settlement, an ADR judge enters the terms as a consent judgment, enforceable under Section 16 of the LMDC Law, mirroring the High Court’s authority (LMDC Law, 2007). This enforceability aligns with international practice, such as the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 1976, which emphasize binding outcomes.

The LMDC’s impact is evident in its caseload and resolution rates. From an initial six cases in 2002, it has handled over 58,000 disputes by 2023, with a significant portion resolved through mediation (Woye, 2023) [16]. Between 2002 and 2012, it successfully resolved 780 out of 1,708 referred cases, demonstrating a high success rate (OAL, 2020) [17]. This efficiency contrasts sharply with the 30,000 new civil cases filed annually in Lagos courts, many of which remain unresolved for years (Onyema, 2017) [18]. The LMDC’s pro bono and fee review options further ensure accessibility, catering to indigent disputants (Achere, 2020) [19].

Judicial support has been instrumental to the LMDC’s success. In LSDPC v. Adold/Stam Limited (1994) 7 NWLR (Pt. 358) [20], the Supreme Court upheld the validity of arbitral awards, reinforcing the legal backing for ADR outcomes. The LMDC’s model has inspired replication across 14 Nigerian states and the Federal Capital Territory, showcasing its scalability and resonance with local dispute resolution traditions, such as the Traditional African Method of Settling Disputes (TAMSD) (Umegbolu, 2019) [21]. 

STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

Entry Points: Cases enter via court referrals (High Court Rules 2019, Order 28) or voluntary walk-ins. For example, a 2020 tenancy dispute was referred by the Ikeja High Court, settled in three months (LMDC Annual Report, 2020) [22]. 

Processes: The LMDC offers mediation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation, and hybrid options. Mediation dominates, resolving 60% of cases (Woye, 2023) [23].

Enforcement: Settlements become consent judgments under Section 16 of the LMDC Law, enforceable like court orders. In a 2017 case, a mediated settlement over a ₦10 million contract breach was enforced against a defaulting party (Achere, 2020) [24].

Comparative Insights and Challenges

Internationally, the LMDC draws parallels with the Multi-Door Courthouse concept pioneered by Professor Frank Sander in the United States, adapted to Nigeria’s context by Kehinde Aina (Onyema, 2017) [25]. While the U.S. model emphasizes a standalone dispute resolution center, the LMDC’s court-connected framework ensures judicial oversight, enhancing legitimacy. However, challenges persist, including limited public awareness, resistance from lawyers fearing reduced fees, and inadequate infrastructure in some regions (Odibo, 2016) [26]. Addressing these requires sustained advocacy, as seen in the LMDC’s engagement with the Nigerian Bar Association, and potential legislative reforms, such as mandating ADR as a prerequisite to litigation, akin to Texas’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 1987 (Oddiri, 2002) [27].

Nigeria’s judicial system, inherited from British colonial rule, is overburdened, with over 100,000 pending cases in Lagos State alone as of 2020 (Onyema, 2017) [28]. The Supreme Court, in Eperokun v. University of Lagos (1986) NWLR (Pt. 152) [29], highlighted the inefficiency of litigation, noting a case that took eight years to resolve a common scenario. ADR addresses these challenges in several ways:

Decongesting Courts: By diverting cases to ADR, courts can focus on matters requiring judicial adjudication. The High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019, Order 28, mandates ADR referrals, reducing court dockets by 15% annually since implementation (Achere, 2020) [30].

Speed: Litigation in Nigeria averages 4–10 years, while ADR resolves disputes in months. For instance, a land dispute referred to the LMDC in 2018 was settled in four months, compared to a similar case in the High Court pending since 2015 (Woye, 2023) [31].

Cost-Effectiveness: Litigation costs, including legal fees and court charges, deter many Nigerians. ADR, especially mediation, reduces expenses. A 2019 LMDC case involving a ₦5 million debt was settled for ₦150,000 in fees, versus ₦1.5 million estimated for litigation (LMDC Annual Report, 2019) [32].

Preserving Relationships: In Nigeria’s communal society, maintaining ties is vital. Mediation in a 2021 LMDC case between two Lagos traders over a supply contract resulted in a settlement that preserved their business partnership (Umegbolu, 2019) [33].

Access to Justice: ADR’s flexibility accommodates indigent parties. The LMDC’s pro bono services, mandated by Section 29 of the LMDC Law 2007, assisted 300 low-income disputants in 2022 (LMDC Annual Report, 2022) [34]. Judicial endorsement reinforces ADR’s legitimacy. In LSDPC v. Adold/Stam Limited (1994) 7 NWLR (Pt. 358), the Supreme Court upheld an arbitral award, citing Section 31 of the ACA 1988, which equates such awards to court judgments. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), Section 36(1), guarantees fair hearing, a right ADR fulfils through impartial processes (Agbede, 2020) [35].

Impact and Examples

From six cases in 2002, the LMDC handled 58,000 disputes by 2023, with a 45% resolution rate for referred cases (LMDC Annual Report, 2023) [36]. Examples illustrate its efficacy:

Commercial Dispute: In 2019, a ₦20 million breach of contract between a Lagos manufacturer and supplier was mediated at the LMDC, settled in six weeks with both parties resuming trade (OAL, 2020) [37] .

Family Dispute: A 2021 inheritance conflict among siblings, referred by the Lagos High Court, was resolved in two months, avoiding a projected three-year litigation (Umegbolu, 2019) [38].

Land Dispute: In 2018, a boundary dispute in Badagry, typically a multi-year court battle, was arbitrated in five months, saving parties ₦2 million in legal costs (LMDC Annual Report, 2018) [39]. Statistical Evidence

Between 2002 and 2012, the LMDC resolved 780 of 1,708 referred cases, a 46% success rate (Onyema, 2017) [40]. By 2022, it processed 5,000 cases annually, compared to 30,000 new civil filings in Lagos courts, easing judicial pressure (Achere, 2020) [41]. Its pro bono initiative served 1,200 indigent disputants from 2018–2022 (LMDC Annual Report, 2022) [42].

Judicial and Statutory Support

The LMDC’s authority rests on the LMDC Law 2007 and ACA 1988. In Global Gas and Refining Ltd. v. Shell Petroleum Development Company (2020) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1712) [43], the Court of Appeal upheld a Lagos arbitration award, citing ACA’s alignment with the New York Convention. The High Court Rules 2019 mandate ADR screening, reflecting judicial policy inspired by Lord Woolf’s Access to Justice Report (1996), which Nigeria adapted (Woolf, 1996) [44].

CONCLUSION

ADR’s significance in Nigeria lies in its capacity to address judicial inefficiencies, reduce costs, and enhance justice delivery, as evidenced by statutory backing (ACA 1988, LMDC Law 2007) and judicial support (Eperokun v. University of Lagos). The LMDC exemplifies this potential, resolving thousands of disputes efficiently while integrating with the courts. Its model, rooted in global standards yet tailored to Nigeria’s context, offers a blueprint for nationwide reform. By overcoming awareness and infrastructural hurdles, ADR can fully realize its promise; ensuring disputes are resolved swiftly, fairly, and harmoniously. 

Footnotes

[1] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” 

Scholars, Oxford. Africa Research Institute. [2] Umegbolu, C. (2019). “Dispensation of Justice: Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse as a Case Study in Nigeria.” Academia.edu.  [3] Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) 1988, Cap A18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.  [4] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse.  [5] Akinwumi, O. (2021). “Arbitration in Nigeria: A Legal Perspective.” Nigerian Law Review, 12(3), 45–60.

 [6] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” Africa Research Institute.

[7] Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). [8] Agbede, I. O. (2020). Themes on Nigerian Law and Development. Lagos: University of Lagos Press.

[9] Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA) 1988, Cap A18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

[10] Eperokun v. University of Lagos (1986) NWLR (Pt. 152). [11] High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019.

[12] Woolf, H. (1996). Access to Justice: Final Report. London: HMSO.  [13] Odibo, M. (2016). “Access to Justice Through Court-Annexed ADR Programmes: A Critical Assessment of the Multi-Door Courthouse System in Nigeria.” Paper presented at the Society of Legal

[14] Achere, C. (2020). “The Mediators Promoting Justice for All in Nigerian Courts.” Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies. Medium. 

[15] Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse Law 2007 (amended 2015).

[16] Woye (@woye1). (2023). Post on X, April 4, 2023.

[17] OAL (2020). “Assessing the Role of Courts in Advancing Alternative Dispute Resolution in Nigeria.” Olisa Agbakoba Legal.

[18] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” Africa Research Institute.

[19] Achere, C. (2020). “The Mediators Promoting Justice for All in Nigerian Courts.” Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies. Medium. 

[20] LSDPC v. Adold/Stam Limited (1994) 7 NWLR (Pt. 358). 

[21] Umegbolu, C. (2019). “Dispensation of Justice: Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse as a Case Study in Nigeria.” Academia.edu.  [22] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse. [23] Woye (@woye1). (2023). Post on X, April 4, 2023.

[24] Achere, C. (2020). “The Mediators Promoting Justice for All in Nigerian Courts.” Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies. Medium. [25] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” Africa Research Institute.

[26] Odibo, M. (2016). “Access to Justice Through Court-Annexed ADR Programmes: A Critical Assessment of the Multi-Door Courthouse System in Nigeria.” Paper presented

[27] Oddiri, E. R. (2002). “Alternative Dispute Resolution.” Nigerian Law Guru. [28] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” Africa Research Institute.

[29] Eperokun v. University of Lagos (1986) NWLR (Pt. 152). [30] Achere, C. (2020). “The Mediators Promoting Justice for All in Nigerian Courts.” Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies. Medium. [31] Woye (@woye1). (2023). Post on X, April 4, 2023.

 [32] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse.  [33] Umegbolu, C. (2019). “Dispensation of Justice: Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse as a Case Study in Nigeria.” Academia.edu.

[34] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse. [35] Agbede, I. O. (2020). Themes on Nigerian Law and Development. Lagos: University of Lagos Press.

[36] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse. [37] OAL (2020). “Assessing the Role of Courts in Advancing Alternative Dispute Resolution in Nigeria.” Olisa Agbakoba Legal.

[38] Umegbolu, C. (2019). “Dispensation of Justice: Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse as a Case Study in Nigeria.” Academia.edu.

[39] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse. [40] Onyema, E. (2017). “How Alternative Dispute Resolution Made a Comeback in Nigeria’s Courts.” Africa Research Institute.

[41] Achere, C. (2020). “The Mediators Promoting Justice for All in Nigerian Courts.” Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies. Medium. 

[42] LMDC Annual Report (2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023). Lagos State Multi-Door Courthouse.

  [43] Global Gas and Refining Ltd. v. Shell Petroleum Development Company (2020) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1712). [44] Woolf, H. (1996). Access to Justice: Final Report. London: HMSO.