[2010] KEHC 758 (KLR)
The court found that the arbitral award dated 14th August, 2008 had been duly filed and that the respondent had neither applied to set aside the award nor satisfied it. In the absence of any challenge or satisfaction of the award, the court was satisfied that the applicant was entitled to have the award adopted as a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 758 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Equity Bank Limited; Applicant: Kenya Tea Development Agency Limited; Respondent: Madison Insurance Company Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 326 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Adoption and Enforcement of Arbitral Award
- Outcome
- Application allowed in terms of prayers 1 and 2; costs to the applicant.
- Judges
- A. Ong’injo
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Award Enforcement, Adoption of Award, Arbitration Act Application
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Equity Bank Limited
Applicant
Kenya Tea Development Agency Limited
Applicant
Madison Insurance Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Adoption and Enforcement of Arbitral Award
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arbitral award dated 14th August, 2008 should be adopted as a judgment of the court.
- 2 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to enforce the arbitral award as a decree of the court.
- 3 Who should bear the costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the arbitral award dated 14th August, 2008 had been duly filed and that the respondent had neither applied to set aside the award nor satisfied it. In the absence of any challenge or satisfaction of the award, the court was satisfied that the applicant was entitled to have the award adopted as a judgment of the court and to be granted leave to enforce it as a decree. The court further held that the respondent should bear the costs of the application, as it had failed to take any steps to contest or comply with the award.
Court Disposition
Application allowed in terms of prayers 1 and 2; costs to the applicant.
Orders
- The arbitral award delivered by J. B. Havelock, Arbitrator on 14th August, 2008 is adopted as a judgment of the court.
- The applicant is granted leave to enforce the award as a decree of the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
(MILIMANI COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION)
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 326 OF 2009
IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT 4 OF 1995 AND THE ARBITRATION RULES, 1997
AND
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR ADOPTION OF AN ARBITRATION AWARD DATED 14TH AUGUST, 2008
EQUITY BANK LIMITED ……………….APPLICANT/MORTGAGE
AND
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN
KENYA TEA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED.......................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
MADISON INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED..........................................................................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
The application has been brought through chamber summons under Section 36 (1) of the Arbitration Act, 1995 and Rules 6, 9 and 11 of the Arbitration Rules 1997 and all other enabling provisions of the law. The said application seeks the authority orders:
1. This Honourable Court be pleased to adopt the final award delivered by J. B.Havelock, Arbitrator on the 14th August, 2008 as a judgment of this Honourable Court;
2. The Honourable Court do give the Applicant leave to enforce the award as a decree of this Honourable Court;
3. The costs of this application be payable by the Respondent.
The application is grounded on the grounds as the face of the same. Apart from the above application the application has been supported by the affidavit of Mr. Christopher M’maitsi who has deponed that he is the Head of Legal & Authority Affairs in the applicant.
According to the deponent, when a dispute arose between the parties, the same was referred to the arbitration of Mr. J. B. Havelock who duly heard and determined the dispute. Consequently, the Arbitrator made an award on the 14th August, 2008 in favour of the applicant.
Despite the fact that the said award has already been filed in this cause, the respondent has neither applied to set aside the same nor satisfied the same accordingly to its tenor.
After carefully considering the application together with the attached affidavit I hereby concede to the same in terms of Prayer No. 1 and 2. Apart from the above, I hereby direct that the respondent bears the costs of the application.
MUGA APONDI
JUDGE
Ruling read signed and delivered in open court in the presence of:
Bwire - Applicant’s Counsel
Respondent’s Counsel – Absent.
MUGA APONDI
JUDGE
21ST APRIL, 2010