Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1893/38083| Appears in Collections: | Law and Philosophy Journal Articles |
| Peer Review Status: | Refereed |
| Title: | Insolvency-Related Foreign Judgments in Nigeria: Contextualising English Legal Influence and Comparative Analysis of the UNCITRAL Regime |
| Author(s): | Okoli, Pontian |
| Contact Email: | pontian.okoli@stir.ac.uk |
| Issue Date: | 23-Feb-2026 |
| Date Deposited: | 13-Feb-2026 |
| Citation: | Okoli P (2026) Insolvency-Related Foreign Judgments in Nigeria: Contextualising English Legal Influence and Comparative Analysis of the UNCITRAL Regime. <i>International Insolvency Review</i>. https://doi.org/10.1002/iir.70028 |
| Abstract: | The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has produced the most robust international insolvency regime applicable to countries around the world. The Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (1997) is widely accepted and already very popular among African countries. UNCITRAL adopted two other model laws: (1) the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments (2018); and (2) the Model Law on Enterprise Group Insolvency (2019). Nigeria has neither adopted the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (MLCBI) nor any other relevant international instrument despite the importance of cross-border insolvencies and their economic implications. The United Kingdom, even before Brexit, adopted a narrow approach to the MLCBI which poses challenges for former English colonies that may be inclined to the influence of English legal tradition and judicial influence. The Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments (MLIJ) provides an opportunity to identify and analyse issues that the Nigerian legislator should consider in exploring options to facilitate the recognition and enforcement of obligations arising from insolvency-related judgements. This article provides an analytical overview of the legal regime and delimits the scope of existing frameworks. There is a comparative assessment of whether any interpretive scope for comity exists in the applicable regime, considering the MLIJ's aim of promoting comity and cooperation between jurisdictions. The article examines how relevant UNCITRAL jurisprudence can support legislative developmentâincluding how the legislator can manage comity challenges considering relevant tests under the MLIJ. Other countries in a similar position as Nigeria will benefit from the analysis and recommendations in this article. |
| DOI Link: | 10.1002/iir.70028 |
| Rights: | This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Licence URL(s): | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intl Insolvency Rev - 2026 - Okoli - Insolvency___related foreign judgements in Nigeria Contextualising English legal.pdf | Fulltext - Published Version | 2.28 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is protected by original copyright |
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.
