[2015] KEHC 8375 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 8375 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had properly declared a dispute under the contract, triggering the arbitration clause. The defendant's unilateral termination of the contract on grounds of fraud and corruption, without proper investigation or due process, was not justified. The court held that the existence of an arbitration clause and the declaration of a dispute required the matter to be referred to arbitration. The court further determined that interim measures of protection were warranted to preserve the subject matter of the dispute and prevent irreparable harm to the applicant pending arbitration. The defendant's concerns about project delays and financial loss did not outweigh...

Citation
[2015] KEHC 8375 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Osano and Associates; Defendant: ICT Authority
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
4 December 2015
Case Number
Civil Suit 186 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Interim Measures Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Plaintiff's applications for interim relief allowed; defendant's application to set aside interim orders dismissed; dispute referred to arbitration.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Arbitration Clauses, Interim Injunctions, Contract Termination, Fraud Allegations, Remedies Pending Arbitration
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Arbitration Clauses Interim Injunctions Contract Termination Fraud Allegations Remedies Pending Arbitration

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Osano and Associates

Plaintiff

ICT Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Interim Measures Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a dispute to be referred to arbitration under the contract.
  2. 2 Whether the termination of the contract by the defendant was justified under the alleged grounds of fraud and corruption.
  3. 3 Whether interim measures of protection should be granted pending arbitration.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had properly declared a dispute under the contract, triggering the arbitration clause. The defendant's unilateral termination of the contract on grounds of fraud and corruption, without proper investigation or due process, was not justified. The court held that the existence of an arbitration clause and the declaration of a dispute required the matter to be referred to arbitration. The court further determined that interim measures of protection were warranted to preserve the subject matter of the dispute and prevent irreparable harm to the applicant pending arbitration. The defendant's concerns about project delays and financial loss did not outweigh...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's applications for interim relief allowed; defendant's application to set aside interim orders dismissed; dispute referred to arbitration.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's Chamber Summons and Notice of Motion applications (1st and 2nd applications) are allowed as prayed.
  • The Defendant's Notice of Motion application dated 18th May 2015 is dismissed.