Justice Robin Knowles was resolute in his ruling that Process & Industrial Developments (P&ID) fraudulently obtained an $11 billion arbitral sum, citing a series of instances involving the continuous bribery of Nigerian officials and unauthorised access to internal documents.

His decision, delivered late last month, spared Nigeria from potential severe fiscal debt and exposed the extent of the breaches that marred the initial arbitration proceedings believed to be "nowhere the truth".

Justice Knowles, ruling on Nigeria's appeal, ruled that elements of bribery predated the commencement of arbitration and continued during the proceedings. He also pledged to pass a copy of the judgment to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Bar Standards Board to review the conduct of Trevor Burke KC, a barrister, and Seamus Andrew, a solicitor, who represented P&ID during the arbitration.

"This case has also, sadly, brought together a combination of examples of what some individuals will do for money. Driven by greed and prepared to use corruption; giving no thought to what their enrichment would mean in terms of harm for others," he wrote.

Burke and Andrew both provided statements saying they did not accept the criticisms and that they were confident their conduct would be vindicated by the regulator, with whom they would be cooperating fully.

Burke said: "I gave my evidence in the English proceedings in good faith and to the best of my ability," while Andrew added the suggestions of untrue evidence were "contrary to the Judge's clear finding that I did my best to answer the questions asked of me carefully and accurately".

Although P&ID have rejected the ruling and the senior lawyers indicted have denied any wrongdoing, legal experts and arbitrators contend that the breaches highlighted by the judge underscore what some believe to be the corrupt underbelly of international investment arbitration.

Those who spoke to Law.com International, said that such infractions are not unprecedented and such behaviour can have a detrimental impact on the practice of international arbitration.

These malpractices come off as falsified evidence, fake consent orders, bribery, dishonesty and in some cases, sham arbitrations and settlements, they said.

'Paid to Tell Lies'

Leigh Crestohl, an international arbitration specialist and partner at Zaiwalla & Co, emphasised the integrity of most arbitrators but pointed out that 'darker elements' who want to exploit a system usually find a way to do so.

"I have been involved in court processes in the English High Court where you just know when you see it that someone is not telling the truth. I have had witness statements that have come in for and from lawyers in other countries who I know have been paid to tell lies. This happens. It is not unique to the arbitration world."

"I think the problem about arbitration is that so much of it happens behind closed doors because it is a private process," he added.

Crestohl however maintained that the breaches in this case do not speak to the arbitration process but the participants who corrupted the process.

Hogan Lovells partner Thomas Kendra added cases like these breed doubt in the efficacy of the arbitration process and undermine its credibility.

For Kimberly Bazelais, an investment arbitration expert at Signature Litigation's Paris office, in light of the malpractices, intensive standards and processes of review may "become the norm" in international arbitrations.