[2021] KEHC 96 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 96 (KLR)

The court found that the Applicant had complied with all statutory requirements for recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award, including filing the original award and arbitration agreement. The evidence demonstrated that the Respondent was duly notified of the appointment of the Arbitrator, the venue, and the arbitral proceedings, but chose not to participate. The Respondent did not file any application to set aside the award within the prescribed period under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act. The court held that, in the absence of a pending challenge, the arbitral award is final and binding, and there was no basis for refusing recognition or enforcement. The Respondent's...

Citation
[2021] KEHC 96 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: George K. M. Kamanda; Respondent: Dinara Developers Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
21 September 2021
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E655 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Recognize and Enforce Arbitral Award
Outcome
application granted
Judges
MW Muigai
Legal Topics
Arbitral Award Enforcement, Recognition of Awards, Arbitration Procedure, Contractual Disputes
Source Language
English
Alternative Dispute Resolution Commercial and Corporate Arbitral Award Enforcement Recognition of Awards Arbitration Procedure Contractual Disputes

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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George K. M. Kamanda

Applicant

Dinara Developers Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Recognize and Enforce Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent was informed of the appointment of the Arbitrator.
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent was informed of the venue of the arbitration.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent participated in the arbitral proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Applicant had complied with all statutory requirements for recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award, including filing the original award and arbitration agreement. The evidence demonstrated that the Respondent was duly notified of the appointment of the Arbitrator, the venue, and the arbitral proceedings, but chose not to participate. The Respondent did not file any application to set aside the award within the prescribed period under Section 35 of the Arbitration Act. The court held that, in the absence of a pending challenge, the arbitral award is final and binding, and there was no basis for refusing recognition or enforcement. The Respondent's...

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • The Final Arbitral Award dated 27th November 2019 is recognized as binding and enforceable as an order of the court.
  • The Applicant's Chamber Summons dated 11th March 2020 is allowed.