[1995] KECA 69 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the arbitration award filed in the High Court was not valid because it was not signed by all the persons who made it, as mandated by Order XLV rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules. This procedural defect constituted an error of law on the face of the record and amounted to misconduct by...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] KECA 69 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Mwita Merengo; Respondent: Werema Merengo
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 33 of 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; award set aside; matter remitted to High Court for hearing and disposal; costs to appellant.
- Judges
- JE Gicheru, AM Akiwumi, AB Shah
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Awards, Procedural Irregularities, Misconduct of Arbitrators
- 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
Mwita Merengo
Appellant
Werema Merengo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arbitration award filed in the High Court was valid despite not being signed by all arbitrators as required by law.
- 2 Whether failure to comply with Order XLV rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules amounts to misconduct by the arbitrators.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the arbitration award filed in the High Court was not valid because it was not signed by all the persons who made it, as mandated by Order XLV rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules. This procedural defect constituted an error of law on the face of the record and amounted to misconduct by the arbitrators. The court disagreed with the High Court's finding that the award was proper and concluded that the failure to comply with the mandatory signing requirement rendered the award invalid. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the award was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the High Court for hearing and disposal.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; award set aside; matter remitted to High Court for hearing and disposal; costs to appellant.
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- The arbitration award is set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT KISUMU
(CORAM:GICHERU, AKIWUMI & SHAH, JJ.A.)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 33 OF 1995
BETWEEN
MWITA MERENGO………………………….APPELLANT
AND
WEREMA MERENGO………………….RESPONDENT
(Appeal from the judgment/order of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (Mabaluto , J.) dated 14th September, 1994
IN
H.C.C. CASE NO. 330 OF 1991)
**************************
JUDGMENT OF COURT
The award filed in the superior court on 7th December, 1992 was not signed by all the persons who made it as is required by rule 10 of Order XLV of the Civil Procedure Rules. This was an error of law on the face of the record and amounted to misconduct by the arbitrators. Contrary to the learned judge’s holding that the said award was proper, we think in the circumstances referred to above, this was not so. Accordingly, we allow this appeal, set aside the award and order that the matter be remitted to the superior court for hearing and disposal by that court. The costs of this appeal are awarded to the appellant.
Dated and delivered at Kisumu this 14th day of June, 1995.
J. E. GICHERU
…………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. M. AKIWUMI
……………………..
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A.B. SHAH
…………………….
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR