Analysis

In Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Process & Industrial Developments Limited (‘Nigeria v. P&ID’),[1] the English court was faced with an application for extension of time to challenge an arbitration award delivered well over two years before the application. The court granted the application despite the delay, on the basis that there was a strong prima facie case of fraud involved. This paved the way for a thorough inquiry into the allegations of fraud, which if proven, would upset the validity and finality of the arbitration award. This article will review the judgment of the court in Nigeria v. P&ID and highlight its contribution to jurisprudence on determining the point at which an allegation of illegality will be allowed to threaten the finality of an award.

In theory, states may be able to invoke Article 73(b)(iii) in defence of measures that are implemented to tackle COVID-19. However, in this post, I have not sought to analyse whether or not invoking Article 73(b)(iii) is a realistic option for some states (especially those in the global south). In a separate post published here, I have suggested that, while (in theory) states might be able to invoke the security exception in the TRIPS Agreement in response to COVID-19, this is not necessarily a realistic option (especially for states that do not possess local manufacturing capacity).

To ensure that innovative capacity is developed on the continent, it is pertinent to promote regional innovation. As a starting point, negotiators of the AfCFTA may consider including in the text appropriate provisions that will allow the collaboration and nurturing of innovative capacity in Africa. Open innovation is an approach that meets the needs of Africa and is worth considering.

In the webinar, the panelists brilliantly discussed salient subjects pertinent to global intellectual property (IP) rights rules and relevant implementation mechanisms at regional and national levels. In quintessential Afronomicslaw.org fashion, the discussions underscored Global South interests and reinforced the importance of fostering development-oriented IP systems.

It is time for international economic law to start paying serious attention. Law and politics have a complementary role in addressing the growing climate change crisis. Law has to pay attention to its antecedent: politics.

A decolonised international law module, and the law curriculum in general, should be able to imagine the world beyond a simplistic notion of ‘the law says so’

In this essay, I argue for centering systemic racism in the study of international law. This is neither an original method nor argument when applied to legal education. Teaching law with a focus on context—systemic racism for example—has a long tradition.

In teaching and researching international law in Kenya, the key shift that could be considered is the incorporation of critical perspectives, the increase in publication of international law scholarship by African scholars and the shift to more effective teaching strategies.

This post is a dissection of the contents of and processes that culminated in my very first experience of teaching international law with a view to regulate cyberspace as a domain of conflict between States.

Implementing PBL as a teaching method has its advantages and disadvantages. Until now, this method is still used mainly for small classes and students who opted for specialized courses under international law. Also, due to the exceptional circumstances of the outbreak of COVID-19, there has been a modification of the delivery of the PBL using different teaching tools as noted above. The development of learning methods and learning facilities continues to be carried out from time to time with adjustments to existing conditions in society, including the development of information technology.