[2020] KEHC 9723 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent was duly served with all relevant notices and documents pertaining to the arbitral proceedings and the application to enforce the award. The respondent's failure to participate in the arbitration, despite being given multiple opportunities and clear notice, amounted to a waiver of its right to object to the proceedings or the award. The grounds advanced by the respondent for setting aside the award—namely, lack of notice and public policy—were not supported by the evidence, which showed ample and uncontroverted service and opportunity to be heard. The court further held that the arbitral award had already been recognized and enforced by a prior court...
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 9723 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Digital Divide Data Kenya Ltd.; Respondent: Coretec Systems and Solutions Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Judgment Date
- 23 April 2020
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application E052, 341 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Consolidated Applications to Set Aside Arbitral Award, Stay Execution, and Deposit Security
- Outcome
- Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed with costs to the applicant. Applications for stay of execution and deposit of security dismissed as overtaken by events.
- Judges
- WA Okwany
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Award Enforcement, Setting Aside Arbitral Award, Service of Process, Public Policy Exception, Waiver of Rights, Court Intervention in Arbitration
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Digital Divide Data Kenya Ltd.
Applicant
Coretec Systems and Solutions Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Consolidated Applications to Set Aside Arbitral Award, Stay Execution, and Deposit Security
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether service of the application to enforce the arbitral award was properly effected on the respondent.
- 2 Whether the arbitral award should be set aside on grounds of lack of notice and public policy.
- 3 Whether a stay of execution of the decree should be granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent was duly served with all relevant notices and documents pertaining to the arbitral proceedings and the application to enforce the award. The respondent's failure to participate in the arbitration, despite being given multiple opportunities and clear notice, amounted to a waiver of its right to object to the proceedings or the award. The grounds advanced by the respondent for setting aside the award—namely, lack of notice and public policy—were not supported by the evidence, which showed ample and uncontroverted service and opportunity to be heard. The court further held that the arbitral award had already been recognized and enforced by a prior court...
Court Disposition
Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed with costs to the applicant. Applications for stay of execution and deposit of security dismissed as overtaken by events.
Orders
- The application dated 1st August 2018 to set aside the arbitral award is dismissed with costs to the applicant.
- Applications for stay of execution and for deposit of security are dismissed as overtaken by events.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment