[2023] KEHC 20408 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 20408 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of proceedings or stay of adoption of the arbitral award. There was no appeal properly filed in the Court of Appeal annexed to the application, nor any order from the Court of Appeal staying the proceedings. The grounds relied upon by the applicant were substantially the same as those previously raised and determined in the application to set aside the arbitral award, rendering the court functus officio on the subject matter. The court further held that since the applicant had already moved to the appellate court seeking similar orders, it was proper for all related applications to be canvassed...

Citation
[2023] KEHC 20408 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Mark Properties Limited (In Administration); Respondent: Globe Developers Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
17 July 2023
Case Number
Arbitration Cause E001 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Cause / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings and Stay of Adoption of Arbitral Award
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JWW Mong'are
Legal Topics
Arbitral Award Enforcement, Stay of Proceedings, Setting Aside Arbitral Award
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Arbitral Award Enforcement Stay of Proceedings Setting Aside Arbitral Award

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Properties Limited (In Administration)

Applicant

Globe Developers Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Cause / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings and Stay of Adoption of Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a stay of proceedings pending the hearing and determination of an application for leave and stay of execution in the Court of Appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of adoption of the arbitral award.
  3. 3 Whether the High Court is functus officio regarding the issues previously determined in relation to the arbitral award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of proceedings or stay of adoption of the arbitral award. There was no appeal properly filed in the Court of Appeal annexed to the application, nor any order from the Court of Appeal staying the proceedings. The grounds relied upon by the applicant were substantially the same as those previously raised and determined in the application to set aside the arbitral award, rendering the court functus officio on the subject matter. The court further held that since the applicant had already moved to the appellate court seeking similar orders, it was proper for all related applications to be canvassed...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated May 19, 2023 is dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs of the application.