Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The practical application of international conventions like the Montreal Convention of 1999 and the OHADA Uniform Act of 2023 in the context of attaching goods onboard aircraft presents significant challenges. These frameworks do not explicitly address the attachment of such goods, focusing instead on liability and recovery procedures. The OHADA Uniform Act aims to simplify recovery processes but may struggle with conflicting national regulations and regional legal practices. The absence of specific legislation for attaching goods in-flight creates a critical gap, leading to uncertainty and inefficiency in enforcement. Addressing this gap in this paper requires developing targeted legal solutions that align with international standards while addressing the unique demand of air transport.

OHADA is amongst an international organization which consists of arbitral tribunal within some regions in Africa in handling international investment and commercial disputes. Henceforth, the purpose of this study is to examine the effectivity of the enforcement of arbitral awards under the perspectives of OHADA arbitration rules. The study axed through qualitative approach by interpreting legal rules, analyzing cases and commenting the weakness of the charter in terms of enforcement and recognition of arbitral awards. The decision of OHADA arbitral tribunal shall contain intrinsically legal binding to member countries, however it leads problematics as the enforcement and recognition rules may be different in every country involved. Hence, the study interpreted the legal rules concerning enforcement and recognition of arbitral awards and the effectiveness of the rules. In addition it exerted also the challenges and significant recommendation for improving arbitration rules relating to enforcement of the awards. It is found that the weakness of the arbitral awards locates on refusal of concerned State to enforce the awards under the domestic law due to conflict of interest.

This study traces the evolution of the CCJA case law on the principle of exemption from enforcement for public companies. It aims in particular to highlight the direction in which this case law is moving. It appears that the CCJA has so far not succeeded in elaborating its own definition of the concept of 'public companies'; yet it is there that, in our view, the mystery of the immunity from execution that it has long recognized to these companies hides; even when they were incorporated in the form of a corporation. However, over time, the Court has rightly reversed its previous decisions by moving from an extensive to a restrictive interpretation of exemption from enforcement. In any case, the involvement of the lawmaker is more than welcome in order to put an end to the situation of inequality, which has existed for a long time in terms of enforcement under OHADA law, between corporations having the State or its branches (public companies) as shareholders and those whose shareholders have no State participation.

Businessmen have a choice in the resolution of disputes, they may elect litigation or submit to arbitration. Delays, outrageous cost and undue technicalities associated with courts, makes commercial arbitration the preferred mode of settlement in the business world. However, the recalcitrance of an award-debtor to comply with the terms of the award necessitates the intervention of the courts. Nigeria has provisions for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards within her legal system. However, reliance on courts for enforcing foreign awards frequently frustrates the gains initially made by arbitration. Enforcement of arbitral awards via the courts has numerous legal challenges. This study is therefore aimed at analysing the challenges facing enforcement of foreign awards in Nigeria. The objectives of the study were to: (i) analyse the impact of extant legal regimes on the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Nigeria; (ii) examine the effects of the concepts of arbitrability and public policy exceptions on the enforcement of awards in Nigeria; (iii) examine the challenges inherent in judicial review on the enforcement of foreign awards in Nigeria; and (iv) examine the adequacy of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1988 (ACA 1988) in the recognition and enforcement of Islamic commercial arbitral awards. The study employed doctrinal methodology of legal research where primary and secondary of legal materials were subjected to descriptive and content analysis. The primary sources used were legislations, regulations, treaties, conventions and case laws, while secondary sources used were texts books, journals, internet materials, conferences and seminars papers. The findings of the study were that: i. the provisions of the laws regulating enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Nigeria, particularly, Sections 51 and 54 of ACA 1988 have inherent and procedural defects, thus preventing the smooth enforcement of the award; ii. the narrow interpretation by the Nigerian courts on ‘arbitrability’ based on Sections 54 and 57 of ACA 1988 which restricts disputes to contractual and commercial disputes only, prevents the enforcement of foreign awards from jurisdictions with liberal interpretation. iii. the amorphous nature of the scope of public policy creates a challenge for the courts in Nigeria in determining whether a foreign award violates the country’s public policy or not; iv. the powers of the courts to set aside foreign awards based on grounds contained in Sections 29, 30 and 48 ACA 1988 are open-ended and allow the courts to examine the merit of the disputes rather than limit themselves to the validity of the award for enforcement; v. the provisions of ACA 1988 on enforcement of foreign arbitral awards do not consider the idiosyncrasies of awards from Islamic law jurisdictions, despite growing investors’ interests in Islamic commercial transactions. The study concluded that it is obvious that the various legal challenges identified showed that the existing legal frameworks on enforcement of foreign arbitral award in Nigeria are weak and ineffective. The study therefore recommended that the Nigerian arbitral laws in particular, the provisions on enforcement of arbitral awards under ACA 1988 should be amended.

The vast number of commercial transactions that take place daily in the modern business world will be inconceivable without negotiable instruments like cheques. This is the reason why the recovery of debts inherent in cheques without cover has been given the attention it deserves within the CEMAC Region under the OHADA Uniform Act on Business Law. The OHADA Uniform Act on Simplified Recovery Procedure and Enforcement Measures has instituted a procedure in the member states of the OHADA zone to recover debts of a company when it eventually goes bankrupt or when it winds up. It should however be understood that all the member states of CEMAC are OHADA signatories. This ipso facto means that Cameroon being a member of CEMAC, with its bi jural nature, where the Common Law and Civil law legal systems operates in the Former West Cameroon and Former East Cameroon respectively, both parts of the country are bound to implement the OHADA Uniform Act in their various jurisdictions. The Uniform Act on Simplified Recovery Procedures and Enforcement Measures was issued on the 10th of April 1998. Like the Uniform Act on Securities, this Act overlaps the bound of pure business law in that it effects a general reform of civil procedure in relation to recovery and enforcement. The reform was indispensable of the OHADA Member States, only Mali had, in 1994, put in place a modern system that was suited to present day economic and social conditions. Otherwise, the relevant legislation dated, at best from the 1970s and in several cases from colonial times. The OHADA Uniform Act governs commercial companies and Economic Interest groups. Since banks are commercial companies governed under Public Limited Companies S. As , they are equally governed by the OHADA Uniform Act. Thus, this paper questions the potentials of the OHADA Simplified Recovery Procedure and Enforcement Measures in relation to the special mechanisms for the Recovery of Debts inherent in cheques without cover in Cameroon.

LL.M. (International Commercial Law) Please refer to full text to view abstract

“Banks are neither private attorneys general nor bounty hunters, armed with a roving commission to seek out defaulting homeowners and take away their homes in satisfaction of some other bank’s deed of trust.” This Article examines the judicial treatment of mortgage assignments across various jurisdictions in the foreclosure context. Although some courts do permit debtors to challenge suspicious or problematic assignments, most have ignored such problems and denied standing to debtors attempting to assert assignment-based defenses. This is particularly surprising given the widespread and well-documented problems with foreclosure “robo-litigation,” including backdated documents, fraudulent notarizations, and unauthorized signatures. Despite the abuse of process by foreclosing entities, courts have permitted foreclosures to continue unabated and, in some instances, have even precluded the possibility of discovery to debtors seeking to ensure that title and assignments are legally valid. Judicial ambivalence about formal compliance by mortgage assignors and assignees in the foreclosure context is somewhat ironic given most courts’ routine enforcement of instruments against debtors who do not formally comply with all contractual terms. Current adjudicative approaches to mortgage assignment are seemingly disconnected from the devastating reality of the home mortgage crisis and its causes. Moreover, there are several rationales that would support a more robust enforcement of technical compliance with assignment procedures, including the need for procedural equity, title certainty, and public records integrity. Thus, as evidence exists that banks are still making many of the same problematic mistakes regarding transfer documentation, courts can perform an essential monitoring role as an important spur towards reform. Although it would not address all of the underlying causes of the housing crisis, an adjudicative approach that liberally permits challenges to mortgage assignments would encourage lenders and servicers to be more circumspect in their foreclosure processes.