[2017] KEHC 1522 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 1522 (KLR)

The court found that the contract between the parties contained a valid arbitration clause, and that the process for appointment of the arbitrator was followed as per the contract. The Respondent was given notice and opportunities to participate in the arbitration, as evidenced by correspondence and its own objections, which were duly considered and dismissed by the arbitrator. The Respondent did not appeal the arbitrator's ruling on its objection and chose not to participate further. The court held that the Respondent's claims of lack of notice and procedural impropriety were unsubstantiated, and that the Respondent cannot claim breach of natural justice after refusing to participate...

Citation
[2017] KEHC 1522 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Consolog Engineering Services Limited; Respondent: Water Services Trust Fund
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
29 September 2017
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 122 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Enforce Arbitral Award
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
RB Ngetich
Legal Topics
Arbitral Award Enforcement, Contractual Disputes, Appointment of Arbitrator, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitral Award Enforcement Contractual Disputes Appointment of Arbitrator Natural Justice

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Consolog Engineering Services Limited

Applicant

Water Services Trust Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Enforce Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral award dated 25th November 2016 should be enforced against the Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration process and appointment of the arbitrator were conducted in accordance with the contract and the law.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent was afforded an opportunity to participate in the arbitration process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the contract between the parties contained a valid arbitration clause, and that the process for appointment of the arbitrator was followed as per the contract. The Respondent was given notice and opportunities to participate in the arbitration, as evidenced by correspondence and its own objections, which were duly considered and dismissed by the arbitrator. The Respondent did not appeal the arbitrator's ruling on its objection and chose not to participate further. The court held that the Respondent's claims of lack of notice and procedural impropriety were unsubstantiated, and that the Respondent cannot claim breach of natural justice after refusing to participate...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Judgment is entered in favour of the Applicant in terms of the arbitral award dated 25th November 2016.
  • The Respondent shall pay the Applicant KES 3,079,080 within 14 days of the award, failing which interest at 12% per annum applies until payment in full.