[2020] KEHC 9912 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 9912 (KLR)

The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review its own decision made under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act, as the Act does not provide for such review and expressly limits court intervention to specific circumstances. The Arbitration Act is a complete code governing arbitration, and its provisions on finality and limited recourse are deliberate to ensure certainty and autonomy in arbitral proceedings. The grounds advanced by the applicant for review were either previously canvassed or should have been raised in the application to set aside the award, and do not meet the threshold for review under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court further held that communications...

Citation
[2020] KEHC 9912 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Coretec Systems and Solutions Ltd; Respondent: Digital Divide Data Kenya Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
9 July 2020
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application E052 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Arbitral Award Decision
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
WA Okwany
Legal Topics
Arbitral Award Review, Finality of Arbitral Awards, Court Jurisdiction in Arbitration, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Payment by Instalments, Without Prejudice Communications
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitral Award Review Finality of Arbitral Awards Court Jurisdiction in Arbitration Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Payment by Instalments Without Prejudice Communications

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 6 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coretec Systems and Solutions Ltd

Applicant

Digital Divide Data Kenya Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Arbitral Award Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review its ruling rejecting an application to set aside an arbitral award under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act.
  2. 2 Whether letters written on a 'without prejudice' basis are admissible for the purposes of determining settlement or payment terms.
  3. 3 Whether the court can order payment of the arbitral award by instalments or substitute the arbitral award with a different sum.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review its own decision made under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act, as the Act does not provide for such review and expressly limits court intervention to specific circumstances. The Arbitration Act is a complete code governing arbitration, and its provisions on finality and limited recourse are deliberate to ensure certainty and autonomy in arbitral proceedings. The grounds advanced by the applicant for review were either previously canvassed or should have been raised in the application to set aside the award, and do not meet the threshold for review under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court further held that communications...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 20th May 2020 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • No review or variation of the ruling delivered on 23rd April 2020 is granted.