Insolvency‐related foreign judgements in Nigeria: Contextualising English legal influence and comparative analysis of the UNCITRAL regime

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 development—including 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.