Department of Business Law

Permanent URI for this community

https://ir.oauife.edu.ng/handle/123456789/1936

Browse

Browsing Department of Business Law by Title

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    An Evaluation of the Patent System in Relation to Transfer of Technology in Nigeria
    (2015-03-20) Adedeji, Adewole Adisa
    The study examined the patent system in Nigeria. It assessed the effectiveness of the protection of invention and technical know-how, identifying the shortcomings of the system, and proposed appropriate strategies for legal and institutional reforms. This was with a view to enhancing its role in promoting transfer of technology in Nigeria. The study obtained primary information from judicial decisions, legislation and international conventions: the Patent and Design Act 1970, the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883, the Agreement on Trade Related Aspect of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) of 1994, National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion (NOTAP) Act, as well as legislation relating to the patent system. Secondary data were obtained from published texts, journals, opinions of intellectual property law scholars, official records, and documents of international institutions like the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) etc. Vital information was also gathered from the Patent Registry Abuja, through unstructured interviews conducted with the Registrar of Patent, and the Director of NOTAP. The data collected was also subjected to content analysis. The study showed that Nigeria's current patent regime was formulated during the colonial era, and was never designed to facilitate technological development through the transfer of technology. Important provisions that could have aided technology transfer like utility models were not provided for. Even the relevant provision relating to allied matters like the concept of patentability, were copied almost verbatim from the International Bureau for the Protection of Intellectual Property Model Law on Invention of 1965, without taking into consideration the peculiar nature and needs of Nigeria. The study further revealed that the internal workings and operation of the Patent Registry in Nigeria were not conducive to technology transfer. The Registry as currently organized operated as an archive attached to the Federal Ministry of Commerce, than an industrial property documentation and information centre, that will be responsible for playing the traditional role of rendering and disseminating information on local and international inventive efforts in different fields of invention and technology. Moreover, the Paris Convention of 1883 and the Trade Related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement of 1994, to which Nigeria is a party, were not really in the interest of Nigeria's technological development as some of their provisions were designed to strengthen the hold and control of the developed countries on intellectual property rights. The study also revealed that the operation and practice of NOTAP as a technology transaction regulatory agency was not suitable enough for technology transfer as there was no system of monitoring compliance with its directive on certified technology transfer agreement. In addition, NOTAP's rigid approach on the choice of law governing technology transfer transaction might be harmful to foreign investment and technology transfer in the present age of globalization. The study concluded that the legal and institutional framework of the Nigerian patent system as presently constituted would not be able to play a significant role as a vehicle for the facilitation of transfer of technology.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Legal Protection of the Consumer in Electronic Commerce in Nigeria
    (2015-04-10) Akomolede, Timothy Ifedayo
    The study analysed the legal issues and problems involved in electronic commerce in Nigeria, examined the laws and institutions that protect consumers and assessed the remedies available to the latter. It also examined the prospects and challenges of a comprehensive consumer protection code for electronic commerce with a view to appraising the legal protection available to consumers in electronic commerce in Nigeria. The study relied on both primary and secondary sources of information. The primary sources were International Conventions, judicial decisions, statutes and bills. These included the Sale of Goods Act (1893), the Consumer Protection Council Act (1992), the Nigerian Electronic Transactions Bill (2005), the Nigerian Information Technology Development Agency Bill (2005) and other legislation that have direct and indirect bearing on the protection of the consumer in electronic commerce. These legislation and bills were compared with similar legislation in the United Kingdom, United States of America, Canada, Australia and South Africa. The secondary sources included textbooks, journals, bulletins, guidelines, circulars, policy documents, newspapers/magazines and the Internet. Information gathered from these sources were subjected to content analysis. The results revealed that the legal protection of consumers in electronic commerce in Nigeria was riddled with some legal problems. These included lack of data protection, non-protection of the privacy of the communication of the parties, non-existence of well articulated rules for entering into Internet contracts, lack of rules and regulations for jurisdictional and choice of law issues, difficulties in proving Internet-related transactions and lack of well-articulated consumer rights and remedies. It further revealed that even though there were laws that protected consumers in general, consumers in electronic specifically protected because the laws were not directed at that class of consumers. It also revealed that existing consumer protection institutions in Nigeria such as the Consumer Protection Council, National Agency for Food Drug Administration and Control and Standard Organization of Nigeria were not given direct responsibilities for protecting consumers in electronic commerce under the laws that established them. Although there were remedies available to the consumers generally, which included contract-based and administrative-based remedies,, they were inadequate because consumers in electronic commerce were not directly in focus. There was also no comprehensive consumer Code in electronic commerce in Nigeria unlike other jurisdictions considered by the study because the legal problems associated with it were just coming up. The study concluded that the legal and regulatory frameworks for the protection of consumers in electronic commerce were yet to take proper shape, which largely could be because it was a budding phenomenon in commercial transactions in Nigeria.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Securities Information Disclosure and Legal Protection of Investors in Nigeria
    (2015-05-05) Olayiwola, Owoade Oladele
    This study examined the statutory and institutional framework for securities transactions, the theoretical bases for, and the regulatory approach to securities information disclosure in Nigeria. It also analysed and evaluated the relational role of mandatory information disclosure, corporate governance controls and anti-fraud provisions in the Nigerian securities regulation with a view to evaluating their efficacy in protecting informed and uninformed investors. The study obtained primary information through the analysis of the Investments and Securities Act, 2004 (ISA), the Companies and Allied Matters Act and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rules and Regulations. Other primary sources of information included judicial and quasi-judicial decisions, the listing requirements of the Nigerian Stock Exchange, company prospectuses, SEC Annual Reports and other official documents. A comparative analysis of statutes, rules, reports and judicial decisions of the United States, United Kingdom and the European Union was also done. Secondary data were obtained from published texts, law journals and opinions of securities scholars. Unstructured interviews of some purposively selected key officials of the SEC and the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) clarified the information obtained from the primary sources. The study found that the institutional and legal framework for securities transactions in Nigeria some of the key objectives of securities regulation, including investor protection. The study established that Nigeria combined a system of government and self regulations of her market through mandatory disclosure of information coupled with anti-fraud penal sanctions and a permissive system of internal corporate governance controls. It also established that the information that the existing regulations required securities issuers and their agents to disclose were too complicated for retail uninformed investors. The retail investors usually did not read the disclosures. Even when they did, only those with expertise in law and finance could understand the disclosures because of their highly technical nature and content. Therefore, it could not be established that the disclosures had helped retail and non-expert investors to make informed investment decisions. The factors that persuaded these investors to invest were increase in the market prices of securities, fad, and perception of investment as savings. The study found that the anti-fraud provisions in the Nigerian securities law were vital, but the penal sanctions were too mild to deter sharp practices and protect investors. The study also found that a recently introduced code of corporate governance for public companies was adequate in content but was only persuasive and devoid of the binding force of law. Therefore no securities issuer could be prosecuted or sanctioned for not complying with its provisions. This contradicted the practice in major securities markets where similar provisions had been enacted as laws in response to fraud by securities issuers prompted by permissiveness. The study concluded that the Nigerian securities information disclosure system protected informed investors, but did not make information available to uninformed investors in the form that they could understand for their investment decisions and protection. In addition, the sanctions for the violation of disclosure duty were too mild.