A hybrid model for defining arbitrability in Ghana | PIL.OT

§PILOTDEVELOPMENT / PIL.OTAcademic publication

PIL.OTv0.58.7

01Home 02PIL.OT Archive 03PIL.OT ATLAS 04PIL.OT Calendar 05Bulletins 06Method 07About

⌕Search archive

Home/PIL.OT Archive

PIL.OT / DEVELOPMENT

Academic publicationInternational civil procedureGhana; Switzerland; Tunisia; England and Wales; United States of America; Singapore01 August 2026

A hybrid model for defining arbitrability in Ghana

Baffour Yiadom-Boakye0 views

Image: Samuel Zeller / Wikimedia Commons (CC0) · CC0-1.0

Development summary

Design and editorial direction: Dr. Ogün Erşan AydınlıOEA / 26

PIL.OT provides general information. The source text prevails; the publication does not advise on individual matters.

PIL.OT Archive About Method and AI Legal notice and AI Corrections policy Privacy / KVKK / GDPR Contact Suggest a source PILOTBot identity

PIL.OT / DEVELOPMENT

Baffour Yiadom-Boakye addresses how the boundaries of arbitrability are determined in Ghanaian international arbitration and how those boundaries affect recognition of arbitration agreements and recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. The analysis places Ghana’s approach alongside those of Switzerland, Tunisia, England and Wales, the United States and Singapore.

The comparison considers legislative, judicial and hybrid models. Yiadom-Boakye recommends that Ghana combine legislative clarity with judicial flexibility to strengthen its arbitration regime and align it with evolving international standards.

Open original publication ↗The Determination of Arbitrability and an Analysis of its Scope in Ghana from Comparative Perspectives

PIL.OT RESEARCH NOTE

Research note

Issue

How arbitrability is determined and scoped in Ghanaian international arbitration, and how that determination affects recognition of arbitration agreements and recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.

Why does it matter?

The article connects Ghana’s model for determining arbitrability with the consequences for recognition of arbitration agreements and recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. It therefore provides a comparative framework for considering the relationship between legislative rules and judicial flexibility in the design of an arbitration regime.

Concepts

international civil procedure academic research international arbitration comparative law recognition and enforcement

ACADEMIC CITATION

Academic details

Baffour Yiadom-Boakye

“The Determination of Arbitrability and an Analysis of its Scope in Ghana from Comparative Perspectives”

African Journal of International and Comparative Law · 2026

DOI 10.3366/ajicl.2026.0573

Content language: English
Type: Journal article

RIS BibTeX CSL-JSON Zotero

Show suggested citation

Baffour Yiadom-Boakye, “The Determination of Arbitrability and an Analysis of its Scope in Ghana from Comparative Perspectives”, African Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2026-08-01, 10.3366/ajicl.2026.0573. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2026.0573

CONTINUE IN THE ARCHIVE

Similar records

Academic publication · 25 August 2026Legal Tools in the EU and England and Wales for Cross-Border SLAPPsinternational civil procedure→Academic publication · 01 August 2026Book review of Chan Leng Sun, Arbitral Awards, 2nd editioninternational arbitration law→Academic publication · 25 August 2026Insolvency Estate Value and Practitioner Cooperation in EU Cross-Border Casesinternational civil procedure→Academic publication · 18 August 2026The PRICL approach to the reinsurer’s duty to follow settlementsconflict of laws→

MONTHLY BRIEFINGThe month’s important developments, with their sources, in one selection.

Join the briefing ↗

Issue 02 · August ’26 Türkçe görünüm Suggest a correction Corrections policy

This PIL.OT development page is for general information and is not legal advice. The underlying source, current official text and the circumstances of any specific matter must be verified separately.