In Senegal, international arbitration is becoming increasingly prevalent as a method of dispute resolution. This trend is supported by the favourable legal environment and the country’s openness to international investment. For example, Senegal has concluded no fewer than 29 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) protecting investors, which demonstrates a desire to encourage a stable and favourable investment climate.

Use of International Arbitration by Domestic Parties

Domestic parties are increasingly turning to international arbitration, particularly when contracting with foreign partners. However, in purely domestic disputes, recourse to judicial litigation or local institutional arbitration (eg, the Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation Centre of the Dakar Chamber of Commerce – CAMC) remains common.

In international commercial contracts, Senegalese companies generally accept arbitration clauses providing for recourse to international arbitration, often administered by institutions such as:

• the ICC (International Court of Arbitration in Paris);
• the CCJA, which is the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration for OHADA (Organisation pour l'harmonisation en Afrique du droit des affaires), a shared corporate law system across 17 West and Central African countries; or
• particularly in investment matters, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

Basis for the Use of International Arbitration in Senegal

International arbitration is used in Senegal mainly for the following reasons.

• Contractual choice of arbitration as a means of dispute resolution – In many international conventions or international commercial contracts, Senegalese companies generally accept arbitration clauses providing for recourse to international arbitration, often administered by institutions such as the ICC, CCJA or ICSID.
• Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards – Senegal is a party to the 1958 New York Convention and ratified it in 1994. This facilitates the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Senegal has not made any reservations to the general obligations arising from the Convention. Senegalese judicial practice is generally favourable to such enforcement, subject to compliance with legal conditions.
• Seat of arbitration – Although Senegal is not yet a major seat of international arbitration, it aspires to become one. The CAMC is seeking to position itself as the leading arbitration institution in the sub-region. The country’s legal and political stability reinforces this ambition.

Certain industries in Senegal have seen significant international arbitration activity in recent years. Three sectors stand out, in particular: oil and gas, infrastructure and telecoms/tech.

Hydrocarbons (Oil and Gas)

Since the discovery of significant offshore oil and gas deposits (notably the Sangomar and Grand Tortue Ahmeyim projects), Senegal has become a strategic destination for international investors in the extractive sector. Production sharing agreements, lease agreements, and joint ventures between the state, Petrosen (Senegal’s national oil company), and major oil companies (Woodside, BP, Kosmos, etc) generally include international arbitration clauses, often under the auspices of ICSID or the ICC. The use of arbitration in this sector is due to the political sensitivity of agreements, the large amounts involved, and investors’ desire to avoid local jurisdictions perceived as less neutral.

Infrastructure and Public Works

Senegal has undertaken a number of major infrastructure projects in recent years – including toll motorways, a regional express trainline, an electric bus network in Dakar, and a new international airport (Blaise Diagne International Airport). These projects are often the subject of public-private partnerships (PPPs) with foreign operators. In the event of a dispute, the contracts provide for recourse to international arbitration to reassure foreign investors. The technical nature of such projects, their high costs, and the risks of conflicts related to execution (delays, cost overruns, contractual defects, etc) make this method of dispute resolution more appropriate.

Telecoms and Technology

The opening of the Senegalese market for the provision of information communications technology or infrastructure services to foreign operators has given rise to transnational commercial disputes. These contracts often include arbitration clauses, particularly in the event of technical or financial disputes, in order to ensure a rapid and specialised resolution.

Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation Centre of the Dakar Chamber of Commerce (CAMC)

This is the main national institution for arbitration. It is used primarily for domestic or regional arbitration (West Africa), but it aims to position itself as a centre for international arbitration. In recent years, the CAMC has strengthened its capacities and expanded its reputation, notably with the support of the CCIAE (Chamber of Commerce) and institutional actors.

New Arbitration Institutions in the Last 12 Months

As of July 2025, no major new arbitration institutions have been created in Senegal in the previous 12 months. However, some university legal clinics or private mediation centres are beginning to emerge with arbitration ambitions (eg, YAGG-YONN). These have not yet gained institutional recognition at international level, however.

Certain courts in Senegal have jurisdiction to hear disputes related to arbitration.

In accordance with the OHADA Uniform Act on Arbitration Law, revised on 23 November 2017 (AUA), to which Senegal is a party, the competent court within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal intervenes in arbitration matters, in particular for:

• appeals for the annulment of arbitral awards; and
• applications for the enforcement of arbitral awards, whether national or international.

In addition, the CAMC specialises in arbitration.

In Senegal, international arbitration is mainly governed by OHADA law, in particular the AUA, and applicable in all OHADA member states.

Legislation Applicable to International Arbitration

Senegal does not have specific national legislation on international arbitration. The AUA, which is uniformly applicable in the 17 OHADA member states, governs both domestic and international arbitration, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. In addition, Senegal is bound by the 1958 New York Convention, which governs the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

The AUA is largely based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.

Similarities between the two include:

• recognition of the principle of competence-competence (Article 11, AUA) – ie, that the tribunal has the authority to determine the scope of its own jurisdiction;
• autonomy of the arbitration clause;
• contractual freedom in the appointment of arbitrators, the seat and the applicable law;
• limited recourse against arbitral awards (appeal for annulment only in certain limited cases); and
• possibility of interim measures by the arbitral tribunal.

Differences between the two include the following.

• While the UNCITRAL Model Law applies primarily to international arbitration, the AUA governs both domestic and international arbitration, giving it a broader scope in OHADA member states, including Senegal.
• The role of the supporting judge is more clearly defined and regulated in the AUA. In particular, the supporting judge intervenes in the constitution of the arbitral tribunal when a party obstructs the proceedings, which is not as strictly provided for in the Model Law.
• The procedure for appointing arbitrators is also more detailed in the AUA, particularly when the parties or co-arbitrators are unable to reach agreement. The Act also sets clear rules on procedural deadlines.
• Another point of divergence concerns the time limit for filing an appeal for annulment: while the Model Law generally provides for a three-month time limit, the AUA imposes a shorter time limit of one month from the notification of the arbitral award.
• Finally, jurisdiction to rule on applications for enforcement is conferred by the AUA on the competent court within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, which differs from the more open approach of the Model Law, which leaves it to the states to designate the competent court.

As of July 2025, no major changes have been made to national or regional legislation on arbitration in Senegal over the past twelve months. Senegal has not adopted any autonomous national law amending or supplementing the AUA.

In Senegal, the validity and enforcement of an arbitration agreement are governed by the AUA.

Form of the Arbitration Agreement

The arbitration agreement must be in writing (Article 3 of the AUA). It may take the form of an arbitration clause inserted into a contract (providing for arbitration for future disputes) or an arbitration agreement (entered into after the dispute has arisen). The written agreement may take any form, including an electronic one or an exchange of correspondence.

Capacity of the Parties

The parties to the arbitration agreement must have the legal capacity to enter into contracts. Under OHADA law, legal entities governed by private or public law, including states, may validly enter into arbitration agreements unless their national law expressly provides otherwise.

Arbitrable Subject Matter

The arbitration agreement must relate to an arbitrable dispute – ie, a dispute concerning rights over which the parties have free disposal (Article 2 of the AUA).

Disputes relating to the following are excluded:

• the status of persons (marriage, filiation, etc);
• certain criminal matters; and
• mandatory public policy.

Clear Intention to Resort to Arbitration

The text of the clause must unambiguously express the parties’ intention to submit their disputes to arbitration instead of state courts. In the event of ambiguity or imprecise wording, the courts may refuse to enforce the agreement.

Enforcement and Effects

Where a valid arbitration agreement exists, the state court must declare itself incompetent, unless the clause is manifestly void or unenforceable (Article 13 AUA). The agreement therefore prevents any state court hearing a case where a ruling of that court on the merits would be in violation of the agreement.

Under Senegalese law as applied through the AUA, not all disputes can be submitted to arbitration. There are restrictions on arbitrability based on the nature of the rights involved and public policy.

General Criterion of Arbitrability in the OHADA Area

According to Article 2 of the AUA, disputes relating to rights over which the parties have free disposal may be submitted to arbitration.

States, other public territorial authorities, public institutions, and any other legal entity governed by public law may also be parties to arbitration, regardless of the legal nature of the contract, without being able to invoke their own rights to challenge arbitrability.

Non-Arbitrable Matters in Senegal

Specifically, the following cannot be submitted to arbitration in Senegal:

• Disputes relating to the status of individuals – ie, marriage, divorce, filiation, adoption, nationality, etc.
• Criminal disputes – ie, those falling exclusively within the jurisdiction of the criminal courts.
• Matters relating to public order or the prerogatives of public authorities, such as:
1. questions of nationality law;
2. tax or customs law (disputes with the tax authorities);
3. certain labour law issues falling under mandatory social law; and
4. collective insolvency proceedings (bankruptcy) strictly regulated by the OHADA Uniform Act on Collective Proceedings (AUPC/AP).

It is also debated whether, in practice, certain administrative disputes involving the state or public authorities in the exercise of their sovereign prerogatives (as opposed to commercial contracts) are arbitrable.

General Approach to Determining Arbitrability

The approach generally followed in Senegal is based on a distinction between disposable rights and non-disposable rights. Disposable rights are those that the parties may freely assign, modify or waive by contract – they are arbitrable (eg, commercial disputes, contractual disputes, disputes between partners, etc). Non-disposable rights are those that the parties cannot freely modify because they relate to public policy, family, the state, or fundamental rights – they are not arbitrable.

In Senegal, the approach of national courts to the law governing arbitration agreements and their enforcement is broadly consistent with international standards and falls within the framework of OHADA law.

Law Applicable to Arbitration Agreements – Approach of the Courts

When seized of a matter relating to an arbitration agreement, Senegalese courts refer to the AUA, but also apply the principles of private international law.

• The courts will respect the primacy of the parties’ will. If the arbitration agreement designates an applicable law (eg, French law or English law), the courts will respect that choice.
• In the absence of an express choice, the courts may determine the applicable law according to several criteria:

1. the law of the seat of arbitration;
2. the law applicable to the main contract; or
3. in certain cases, general principles of law or Lex Mercatoria, if this allows the parties’ intention to submit the dispute to arbitration to be honoured.

Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements – Judicial Approach

Senegalese courts apply the principle of negative jurisdiction provided for in Article 13 of the AUA, according to which the state court must declare itself incompetent where a valid arbitration agreement exists unless a clause is manifestly void or manifestly unenforceable.

Are Arbitration Agreements Enforced?

In most cases, arbitration agreements are enforced by Senegalese courts, provided that:

• they are recorded in writing;
• the parties have legal capacity;
• the dispute is arbitrable; and
• the clause is not manifestly invalid.

An arbitration clause can be considered valid even if the main contract in which it is included is declared invalid. This independent validity stems from the application of the rule of separability (also known as the autonomy of the arbitration clause), as provided for in paragraph 4 of Article 3 of the AUA, which declares the arbitration clause to be independent of the main contract.

Senegalese courts strictly follow this rule, in accordance with OHADA law. In the event of a dispute over the validity of the main contract, judges may still confirm the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal on the basis of a valid arbitration clause.

Although the parties to a contract enjoy considerable freedom in choosing their arbitrators in arbitration proceedings, this autonomy is not absolute and is subject to certain limitations provided for in the AUA and judicial practice.

Limits Imposed by Law

• Appointment deadlines: The AUA sets strict deadlines for the appointment of arbitrators. If the parties fail to meet these deadlines, the supporting judge or an arbitral institution may proceed with the appointment (Article 8 of the AUA).
• Incompatibilities and impartiality: Arbitrators must be impartial and independent. The law provides that the parties may not appoint an arbitrator who has a serious conflict of interest or incompatibility.
• Legal capacity: Arbitrators must have the legal capacity and expertise required for the type of dispute.
• Intervention of the supporting judge: In the event of disagreement, failure to appoint or refusal of an arbitrator, the competent state court (district court) may intervene to appoint the missing arbitrators.
• Compliance with mandatory rules: The choice of arbitrators must not contravene mandatory rules of procedure or public policy.

In Senegal, if the method chosen by the parties for appointing arbitrators fails, there are default procedures provided for in the AUA, which apply to both bilateral and multilateral arbitrations.

Default Procedure in the Event of Failure to Appoint

If the parties fail to appoint one or more arbitrators within the agreed time frame, or if they have not provided for a procedure for appointing such, the competent state court (the supporting judge) shall intervene to appoint the missing arbitrators (Article 8 of the AUA).

Default Procedure in Multiparty Arbitration

In multiparty arbitrations (more than two parties), the appointment of arbitrators can be more complex. In the event of disagreement between the parties on the method of appointment, or failure to appoint certain arbitrators, the supporting judge also intervenes to appoint the missing arbitrators. The AUA does not provide for a specific detailed multiparty procedure, but the general principle of intervention by the supporting judge applies. The rules of an arbitral institution chosen by the parties may also provide for specific mechanisms to deal with such situations.

In Senegal, a state court may intervene in the selection of arbitrators in the event of a deadlock or failure of the parties to appoint their arbitrators. This intervention is provided for and regulated by the AUA.

Court Intervention in the Selection of Arbitrators

When the parties are unable to agree on the appointment of an arbitrator, or if one party obstructs the appointment, the competent state court, known as the supporting judge, may be asked to make the appointment. Article 8 of the AUA regulates this mechanism and sets the time limits within which the judge must rule.

Limits on the Court’s Power

• Subsidiary nature – the court only intervenes if the parties have failed to appoint arbitrators in accordance with the agreed procedure or if they have not provided for a procedure.
• Impartiality and transparency – the supporting judge must act impartially, without favouring one party over another, and must respect the principles of fairness.
• Respect for the parties’ wishes – the court must take into account any criteria set by the parties (qualifications, nationality, etc) when selecting arbitrators.
• No interference in merits – the court must not substitute itself for the arbitrators on the merits of the dispute or on procedural aspects other than the appointment.
• Limited recourse – the decision of the supporting judge is in principle final and enforceable quickly, with little possibility of appeal, in order to avoid additional delays.

The provisions governing the challenge and removal of arbitrators are set out in the AUA, which strictly regulates these mechanisms in order to guarantee the impartiality, independence and proper conduct of the arbitration proceedings.

Challenging Arbitrators

The provisions for challenging the appointment of arbitrators are as follows.

• Grounds for challenge – an arbitrator may be challenged if there are justified doubts as to their impartiality or independence, or if they are incompatible with one of the parties or with the nature of the dispute.
• Rights of the parties – any party may apply to the arbitral tribunal or, failing that, to the supporting judge to request the challenge of an arbitrator.
• Time limit – the request must be made as soon as the grounds for challenge are known or should have been known.
• Procedure – the request for challenge is first examined by the arbitral tribunal itself, which rules on the validity of the complaint, and if the tribunal rejects the request, the party may apply to the supporting judge.

Dismissing Arbitrators

The provisions for dismissing arbitrators are as follows.

• Dismissal by the parties – the parties may agree in their arbitration agreement on a mechanism for dismissing arbitrators, but this remains rare.
• Dismissal by the arbitral tribunal – the AUA does not expressly provide for dismissal by the arbitral tribunal, but the latter may invite an arbitrator to withdraw in the event of serious misconduct.
• Dismissal by the supporting judge – in the event of serious misconduct, incapacity, prolonged absence, or impediment, the supporting judge may be asked to dismiss an arbitrator.

Grounds

Common grounds for challenge and dismissal include:

• lack of impartiality or neutrality;
• undisclosed conflict of interest;
• serious breach of professional duties;
• physical or mental incapacity to perform the function; and
• repeated refusal or inability to sit without justification.

In Senegal, requirements relating to the independence and impartiality of arbitrators and the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest are mainly governed by the AUA, supplemented by the rules of the main arbitration institutions active in the region, in particular the CAMC.

Legal Requirements Under the AUA

Article 11 of the AUA requires that each arbitrator be both impartial (not favouring one party over another) and independent (having no personal, professional or financial ties to a party that could influence their neutrality).

Arbitrators must also immediately disclose any situation that could give rise to a conflict of interest as soon as they become aware of it. This obligation applies before their appointment and throughout the arbitration proceedings.

Failure to comply with these obligations may result in the arbitrator being challenged or even dismissed (Article 11, AUA).

Rules of the Main Arbitral Institutions

The CAMC rules contain similar provisions, emphasising:

• the need for the arbitrator to be impartial and independent;
• the obligation to promptly and fully disclose any circumstances that may raise legitimate doubts about his impartiality; and
• procedures for handling challenges to the impartiality of arbitrators.

The principle of competence-competence is fully recognised and applied in Senegal, in accordance with the AUA.

Article 5 of the AUA explicitly states that the arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections relating to the validity of the arbitration clause.

In Senegal, state courts may indeed examine issues relating to the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal, but this intervention is strictly regulated and limited by the AUA.

Circumstances Where a Court May Examine the Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal

A state court may be seized in the context of an action to set aside an arbitral award (an appeal for annulment), in particular if the award was rendered by an arbitral tribunal that lacked jurisdiction.

In summary or incidental proceedings, a court may be called upon to rule on its own jurisdiction or on the validity of the arbitration clause if the parties refer the matter to the court before the arbitral tribunal is constituted.

The supporting judge may intervene to rule on disputes over the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, particularly when appointing arbitrators.

General Attitude of Senegalese Courts

Judicial intervention is seen as a last resort, exercised with caution so as not to impede the autonomy and speed of the arbitration proceedings. Non-interference is favoured, considering that it is up to the arbitral tribunal to decide issues first.

Review of Negative Decisions on the Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunals

When the arbitral tribunal decides that it does not have jurisdiction, the parties may refer the matter to the competent state court for a final decision on jurisdiction. Senegalese courts then review the decision rigorously, but without seeking to challenge the autonomy of the arbitral tribunal. If the state court confirms the arbitral tribunal’s lack of jurisdiction, the arbitral award may be set aside.

In Senegal, a party may challenge the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal at various stages of the proceedings, but this is governed by the AUA in order to ensure the smooth running of the arbitration and avoid delays.

The objection to jurisdiction must be raised before any defence on the merits, unless the facts on which it is based have been revealed subsequently. The arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction in the award on the merits or in a partial award subject to appeal for annulment.

In Senegal, in the context of arbitration governed by the AUA, the standard of judicial review applied to questions of admissibility (arbitrability) and the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal is generally a standard of de novo review – ie, a complete and independent review by the state court.

De Novo Review

The state court is not bound by the arbitral tribunal’s assessment of its jurisdiction or the arbitrability of the dispute. It conducts a new and complete assessment of the facts and law relating to these issues.

In Senegal, national courts take a clear and generally strict approach to legal proceedings brought in violation of an arbitration agreement.

When a party brings a case before a state court even though a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties, the courts generally declare themselves incompetent to hear the merits of the case, in accordance with Article 13 of the AUA. This lack of jurisdiction must be raised ex officio or upon request, and is intended to prevent legal proceedings from interfering with the resolution of the dispute through arbitration. Senegalese courts therefore strictly apply the principle of negative jurisdiction, which excludes the jurisdiction of state courts when the parties have agreed to arbitration.

In Senegal, governed by the AUA, the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal is normally limited to the parties who have entered into the arbitration agreement. However, in certain specific cases, national law allows the arbitral tribunal to declare itself competent with respect to third parties, under certain conditions, without formal distinction between nationals and foreigners.

Jurisdiction over non-signatory third parties may occur:

• when a third party voluntarily agrees to be bound by the arbitration, for example through an adhesion clause or a specific commitment;
• through tacit extension or contractual implication – ie, a third party may be considered bound if its involvement in the contractual relationship is close (eg, where it is a subcontractor, guarantor or indirect co-contractor); and/or
• in complex or multiparty contracts, where the legal relationship justifies including a third party in the arbitration dispute.

OHADA law and Senegalese practice do not make an explicit distinction between nationals and foreigners in this regard. The essential criterion is the clear and unequivocal manifestation of the third party’s consent to arbitration.

An arbitral tribunal is authorised to grant preliminary or provisional measures in accordance with the AUA.

Power to Grant Provisional Measures

Article 14 of the ULA provides that the arbitral tribunal may order any provisional or protective measures it deems necessary to protect the rights of the parties during the arbitration proceedings.

Binding nature of interim measures

Interim measures ordered by the arbitral tribunal are binding on the parties. Their enforcement relies on the good faith of the parties, but in the event of refusal, the parties may refer the matter to the competent state court to enforce these measures. This ensures the effectiveness of the measures and prevents irreparable harm.

Types of Preliminary or Provisional Measures Granted

The arbitral tribunal may order, in particular:

• seizure of assets to ensure the future enforcement of an award;
• prohibition of certain actions likely to cause irreparable harm (eg, prohibition on selling a disputed asset);
• obligation to provide financial guarantees;
• measures to preserve evidence (eg, inspection, seizure of documents); and
• temporary suspension of the performance of certain contractual obligations.

Senegalese courts may grant preliminary or provisional measures in support of arbitration proceedings, particularly when the arbitral tribunal has not yet been constituted or when the measures requested must be enforced quickly.

Senegalese courts recognise and may grant provisional measures to support foreign arbitration proceedings if these proceedings concern parties or property located on Senegalese territory.

The types of provisional measure granted by the courts are as follows:

• precautionary seizure of property;
• prohibition on taking certain actions that could harm a party;
• order to produce or preserve evidence; and
• temporary suspension of the execution of certain acts.

Senegalese law, through the AUA, allows for the use of an emergency arbitrator appointed to order urgent provisional measures.

Decisions rendered by the emergency arbitrator are binding on the parties.

Senegalese courts may intervene to enforce, modify, or annul the measures ordered by the emergency arbitrator. They may also be seized in the event of a dispute concerning the competence or impartiality of the emergency arbitrator.

In Senegal, national law, in particular the AUA, allows arbitral tribunals and competent state courts to order security for costs in arbitration proceedings.

The AUA does not explicitly impose a strict obligation, but leaves discretion to the arbitral tribunal and the supporting judge to order such bonds, with a view to ensuring the regularity and financial viability of the arbitration proceedings.

The arbitral tribunal may require the parties to deposit security to cover the costs of the arbitration, including the arbitrators’ fees, administrative costs, and other costs related to the proceedings.

The supporting judge may also order security for costs, in particular when he or she intervenes in the appointment of arbitrators or measures relating to the arbitration.

Arbitration proceedings are mainly governed by several applicable laws and rules, which regulate both domestic and international arbitration.

As Senegal is a member of OHADA, the AUA is the main source governing arbitration proceedings. It covers all essential aspects: validity of the arbitration agreement, appointment of arbitrators, conduct of the proceedings, jurisdiction of state courts, enforcement of awards, etc.

In addition to the AUA, certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure may apply, particularly for matters not governed by the AUA. Parties may also choose to apply the procedural rules of recognised arbitral institutions, such as the CAMC in Dakar.

Senegal is a party to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which supplements the national framework, particularly with regard to enforcement.

Arbitration proceedings, whether domestic or international, are governed by specific procedural steps set out in the AUA, which aim to ensure that the process is fair, swift and efficient.

The procedure begins with the existence of a written arbitration agreement between the parties, which must be clear and precise as to the intention to resort to arbitration.

The claimant notifies the opposing party of the request for arbitration in accordance with the terms of the agreement or of the chosen rules. This request must contain the essential elements: identity of the parties, subject matter of the dispute, nature of the request, arbitration clause, etc.

An arbitral tribunal is then set up in accordance with the wishes of the parties to the arbitration agreement (Article 7, AUA). In the absence of an agreement between the parties on the appointment procedure, or if their stipulations are insufficient, the following rules apply to arbitrator appointment.       

• In the case of arbitration by three arbitrators:
1. each party shall appoint one arbitrator and the two arbitrators thus appointed shall choose the third arbitrator;
2. if a party fails to appoint an arbitrator within 30 days of receiving a request to that effect from the other party, or if the two arbitrators cannot agree on the choice of the third arbitrator within 30 days of their appointment, the appointment shall be made, at the request of a party, by the competent court of an OHADA member state;
• In the case of arbitration by a sole arbitrator, if the parties cannot agree on the choice of arbitrator, an arbitrator will be appointed by the competent court of an OHADA member state.

After the tribunal has been decided, the parties exchange their briefs, conclusions and exhibits in accordance with the schedule set by the tribunal. The parties may raise preliminary objections, such as jurisdiction.

The tribunal may hold procedural and evidentiary hearings to hear the parties and their witnesses and experts. Hearings are not mandatory if the tribunal considers that the written documents are sufficient.

The arbitral tribunal may order interim or protective measures at any time to protect the rights of the parties.

After the hearing, the tribunal deliberates and issues its arbitral award, which must be reasoned and signed. The award is final and binding on the parties.

The award may be enforced voluntarily or through legal proceedings after confirmation by the competent courts.

In Senegal, the legal framework applicable to arbitrators is mainly defined by the AUA.

Arbitrators have the power to set the rules of procedure, including the schedule for exchanges, the organisation of hearings, the conduct of debates and the management of evidence, in accordance with the principles of equality and adversarial proceedings.

They may rule on their own jurisdiction, including the existence, validity, and scope of the arbitration agreement. Arbitrators may order any protective or interim measures necessary to safeguard the rights of the parties during the proceedings.

They are also empowered to render a final and binding decision on the merits of a dispute.

The duties of arbitrators can be summarised as follows.

• Duty of independence and impartiality: arbitrators must be both independent (no connection with the parties) and impartial (not favouring one party over another), and they must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
• Duty of diligence: they must conduct the proceedings expeditiously and efficiently, without undue delay.
• Duty of confidentiality: arbitration proceedings are generally confidential, and arbitrators must ensure that this confidentiality is maintained.
• Duty to state reasons: the arbitral award must be reasoned, clear, and in accordance with applicable law.
• Respect for the adversarial process: they must ensure that each party is able to present its arguments and evidence under fair conditions.

In Senegal, the requirements relating to the qualifications of legal representatives in court and arbitration proceedings depend on the context – whether it is a domestic (national) proceeding or international arbitration.

In domestic court proceedings, to represent a party before the Senegalese courts, legal representatives must generally be lawyers registered with the Senegalese bar.

In domestic arbitration, proceedings are more flexible:

• parties are free to choose their representatives, who do not necessarily need to be lawyers registered with the Senegalese Bar; and
• representatives may be legal advisors, experts, or any other persons authorised by the party.

In international arbitration, the parties may be represented by foreign lawyers, international legal advisors, or any other representatives of their choice, without restriction based on nationality or registration with a local bar association.

There appears to have been a copy and paste error here. The answer to 7.4 (about the qualifications of legal representatives) has been replicated. There is nothing about the collection and submission of evidence here.

Please provide some content on that topic. For your convenience, I include the question to be answered below.

What is the general approach to the collection and submission of evidence at the pleading stage and at the hearing in your jurisdiction (eg, discovery, disclosure, privilege, use of witness statements and cross-examination)?  Are there any specific rules that apply to any of the above categories?

In Senegal, the rules of evidence in arbitration proceedings generally differ from those applied in domestic court cases.

The AUA gives the arbitral tribunal considerable freedom with regard to the admission, collection, and assessment of evidence. It does not impose strict, codified rules of evidence as in traditional court proceedings. The arbitral tribunal may assess the evidence according to the principles of fairness and loyalty, with free evaluation. The parties are generally invited to produce all relevant evidence to support their claims, in written or oral form.

Unlike domestic proceedings, where the rules of evidence are often rigid (eg, written evidence is required for certain acts), evidence in arbitration is more flexible. The arbitrator may accept evidence that would sometimes be inadmissible in court (such as certain testimony, electronic documents, or informal expert opinions). There is no automatic application of strict procedural rules (eg, modes of evidence, deadlines for production, or presumptions).

The parties may agree on specific rules of evidence or adopt the rules provided by an arbitral institution. Some institutions impose more detailed frameworks for the production of evidence, the filing of briefs, etc.

In Senegal, arbitrators do not have direct powers of compulsion, but may request the assistance of state courts to carry out certain investigative measures.

Arbitrators may request a party to produce documents or call a witness, but without the power of coercion. If they encounter a refusal (to produce documents or appear), they must apply to a competent state court to obtain this measure.

Article 14 of the AUA provides that “[t]he arbitral tribunal may request the competent court to take any investigative measures that it cannot itself order or enforce”. This includes, in particular:

• hearing reluctant witnesses (by subpoena);
• access to documents held by a third party;
• seizure of documents; and
• order for compulsory disclosure.

Difference Between Parties and Non-Parties

Parties to the arbitration are bound by the arbitration agreement and required to co-operate in the proceedings; their refusal to co-operate may be taken into account in the decision on the merits (eg, adverse inference). Third parties are not bound by the arbitration agreement; their co-operation can only be enforced through the courts, at the request of the arbitral tribunal.

Practical Limitations

Seeking judicial assistance from the courts may slow down the proceedings. The judge’s co-operation depends on the compatibility of the measures requested with Senegalese public policy and the rules of civil procedure.

There are rules that promote discretion in arbitration proceedings. Article 9 of the Dakar Arbitration Centre’s rules reaffirms the fundamental principle of confidentiality. Hearings are not public, and arbitrators do not disclose decisions made during the arbitration proceedings to third parties. Article 14 of the CCJA Arbitration Rules expressly provides that: “the arbitration proceedings are confidential. The work of the court relating to the arbitration proceedings is subject to this confidentiality, as are all meetings of the court for the administration of the arbitration”.

The legal requirements relating to arbitral awards are mainly governed by the AUA, which applies to all member states, including Senegal.

Article 20 of the AUA requires a mandatory written form – ie, the award must be rendered in writing. It also requires certain mandatory information. The award must contain:

• the full names of the arbitrators.
• the names or designations of the parties and their domicile or registered office;
• a summary of the respective claims of the parties; and
• the reasons for the decision (unless the parties have exempted the arbitral tribunal from this requirement);

In addition, a certified copy of the award must be notified to the parties by the arbitrators or by the competent arbitration institution.

The AUA does not, however, provide time limits on delivery/rendering of the award.

There are certain limits to the types of relief that an arbitral tribunal may award in Senegal, these primarily being governed by the AUA, Senegalese national law and public policy principles.

An arbitral tribunal may, in principle, award the same remedies as a state court, unless otherwise agreed by the parties or in violation of public policy. The types of remedies allowed include,

• compensatory damages;
• interest on arrears;
• injunctions to do or not to do;
• specific performance
• contractual rectification or revision, if provided for in the contract or applicable law; and
• arbitration costs and expenses.

Any damages that violate a mandatory rule (eg, those that are in violation of human dignity or that breach fundamental rights) would be contrary to public policy and therefore unenforceable.

Article 26 of the AUA prohibits the enforcement of awards contrary to the international public policy of OHADA member states.

The parties are entitled to recover legal costs in arbitration proceedings in Senegal, as follows:

• Article 24 of the CCJA AUA Arbitration Rules gives arbitrators the power to order the allocation of costs, unless the parties agree otherwise; and
• the types of costs concerned are:
1. attorney’s fees;
2. expert fees;
3. procedural costs (institutional or ad hoc); and
4. other expenses incurred in connection with the dispute.

Arbitral awards may only be appealed or overturned if the parties have expressly provided for this. However, there are possible remedies such as an action for annulment, an action for review and third-party opposition.

The decision of the competent court of the OHADA member state on the application for annulment may only be appealed before the CCJA. The arbitral award may be appealed by any person before the court of the state that would have been competent in the absence of arbitration and where that award infringes upon their rights. It may also be subject to an application for review before the arbitral tribunal on the grounds of the discovery of a fact that is likely to have a decisive influence on the outcome of the dispute and which, prior to the award, was unknown to the arbitral tribunal and to the party requesting the review. Where the arbitral tribunal can no longer be convened, the application for review shall be brought before the court of the OHADA member state that would have had jurisdiction in the absence of arbitration (Article 25 of the AUA).

A party wishing to appeal an award rendered by an arbitral tribunal must submit a request to the court within the prescribed time limit by means of an application, which the court shall notify to the opposing party (Article 29 of the AUA).

The scope of application of appeals against arbitral awards may be extended if the parties have expressly provided for this.

Under Senegalese law, which is aligned with the AUA, the merits of an arbitral award cannot be reviewed by a national court.

There is no substantive review under the standard of judicial review of validity. The state courts do not exercise a de novo review of the validity of the arbitral award – ie, they do not retry the case.

Review is strictly limited to the grounds for annulment listed in Article 26 of the AUA.

Senegal is a party to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and ratified it in 1994. Senegal has not made any reservations to the general obligations arising from the Convention.

Procedures and Standards for Enforcing an Arbitral Award

The enforcement of arbitral awards (domestic or foreign) is governed by:

• the AUA (in particular Articles 30 to 34);
• the 1958 New York Convention, ratified by Senegal, for foreign awards; and
• the Senegalese Code of Civil Procedure for enforcement measures.

Exequatur procedure

Before enforcing an arbitral award, the winning party must apply to the competent court (court of first instance) for an exequatur judgment. The court verifies that the award meets the conditions of validity, and in particular that there are no grounds for annulment. Once exequatur has been granted, the award may be enforced as a court judgment.

Standards of review

The judge does not re-examine the merits of the case (principle of limited review) but merely verifies compliance with public policy, the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, and the regularity of the proceedings, etc.

Enforcement of an Award Set Aside by the Courts of the Seat

An award set aside by the court of the seat of arbitration cannot usually be enforced in Senegal. When reviewing the exequatur, the Senegalese judge will take into account the decision to set aside the award rendered by the competent court at the seat. The annulment constitutes an imperative ground for refusal of enforcement (Article 33 of the AUA).

Approach in the Event of a Stay of Proceedings (Suspension) at the Seat

In the event of pending proceedings at the seat (eg, appeal for annulment or opposition), the Senegalese courts tend to suspend enforcement proceedings until the decision at the seat is rendered. This suspension is intended to avoid a conflict of jurisdiction and preserve legal certainty. This practice may vary depending on the circumstances and urgency.

Sovereign Immunity at the Enforcement Stage

A state or state entity may invoke sovereign immunity to oppose the enforcement of an arbitral award. Under Senegalese and OHADA law, this immunity is limited. It does not apply to commercial contracts or acts of economic management (restricted immunity), and it may be waived if the state has consented to arbitration in the agreement (clear arbitration clause). The success of this defence therefore depends on:

• the nature of the act or contract;
• explicit consent to arbitral jurisdiction; and
• the circumstances of the dispute.

In Senegal, the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, whether domestic or foreign, are strictly regulated, with an approach that is generally favourable to arbitration, subject to compliance with certain standards, particularly those related to public policy.

The courts adopt a pro-arbitration approach, in accordance with the AUA and the New York Convention (1958), to which Senegal is a signatory. They ensure that arbitral awards are recognised and enforced quickly, in order to guarantee legal certainty and confidence in arbitration. However, this recognition is not automatic: it is subject to the exequatur procedure, which allows for limited review.

Standard for Refusal of Enforcement on Grounds of Public Policy

The courts may refuse to enforce an arbitral award if it is contrary to national or international public policy.

Standards Applicable to Refusal of Enforcement

Article 31 of the AUA provides that enforcement may be refused if:

• the arbitration agreement is invalid or non-existent;
• the arbitral tribunal was improperly constituted;
• the arbitral tribunal exceeded its powers; or
• the award violates public policy rules.

The New York Convention (Article V) also provides for limited grounds for refusal, including:

• inability of the parties to conclude a valid arbitration agreement;
• failure to notify or impossibility for the party to present its defence;
• award rendered by an incompetent tribunal;
• failure to comply with due process; and
• award contrary to public policy in the country of enforcement.

In Senegal, which applies OHADA law on arbitration, class arbitration or group arbitration is not expressly provided for or regulated by national legislation or by the AUA.

The AUA does not contain any provisions relating to class or group arbitration. Similarly, Senegalese law does not explicitly provide for mechanisms to manage arbitration proceedings for disputes involving several claimants or defendants in the same class.

In the absence of clear rules, the implementation of collective or group arbitration is difficult, particularly with regard to:

• the joinder of parties;
• the management of joint representation;
• the notification and consent of all members of the group; and
• the scope and effect of the award on non-party members.

Limits to Arbitrability

The general principles of arbitration, in particular the autonomy of the parties’ will and the need for express consent to arbitration, further limit the possibility of imposing collective arbitration without explicit agreement. In addition, certain disputes relating to public law or fundamental rights (eg, those relating to employment or consumer law) may be considered non-arbitrable or subject to specific class action procedures.

In Senegal, several codes of ethics and professional standards govern the conduct of lawyers and arbitrators involved in arbitration proceedings.

Lawyers

The Code of Ethics for Lawyers in Senegal, for example, governs the professional, ethical and disciplinary rules with which lawyers registered with the Senegalese Bar must comply. It covers, in particular:

• the duty of confidentiality;
• compliance with the rules of loyalty and independence;
• the duty of diligence and competence;
• the prevention of conflicts of interest; and
• compliance with the rules of communication and publicity.

The Code is further supplemented by general rules on the legal profession, which include requirements on continuing education, professional responsibility, and relations with clients and third parties.

Arbitrators

In Senegal, there is not yet a specific national code of ethics for arbitrators. However, arbitrators are generally subject to the ethical rules of the arbitral institutions they represent, such as the CCJA or the ICC.

There are no specific national rules or legal restrictions expressly dedicated to third-party funding of arbitration in Senegalese legislation or the AUA.

Nor have there been any recent court decisions in Senegal concerning third-party funding in arbitration proceedings.

The AUA does not contain specific rules concerning the consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings.

Consequently, there is no clear legal framework allowing an arbitral tribunal or a national court to automatically consolidate several separate arbitrations.

Third parties may be bound by an arbitral ward in the event of voluntary intervention or compulsory intervention. That an award may causes harm does not change this fact.

The arbitral award may be subject to a third-party notice by any person before the court of the OHADA member state that would have had jurisdiction in the absence of arbitration, and where such an award infringes upon their rights. (Article 25 of the AUA).