[2020] KEHC 2768 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2768 (KLR)

The court held that under section 12 of the Arbitration Act, the process of appointing a sole arbitrator in the event of default by one party is governed by party autonomy. The non-defaulting party is entitled to appoint a sole arbitrator after giving notice, and only if the defaulting party applies to set aside that appointment does the High Court become involved. The court does not have original jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator in such circumstances, and the applicant's invocation of section 12(9) was misplaced. As the applicant had not exhausted the statutory process, the application was premature and could not succeed.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2768 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Pitstop Technologies Limited; Respondent: Dynamic Branding Ventures Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
2 October 2020
Case Number
Civil Suit E257 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Originating Summons for Appointment of Sole Arbitrator
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Arbitrator Appointment, Party Autonomy, Contractual Dispute Resolution Clauses, Premature Application
Source Language
English
Alternative Dispute Resolution Commercial and Corporate Arbitrator Appointment Party Autonomy Contractual Dispute Resolution Clauses Premature Application

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pitstop Technologies Limited

Applicant

Dynamic Branding Ventures Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Originating Summons for Appointment of Sole Arbitrator

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to appoint a sole arbitrator where one party has defaulted in the appointment process under the Arbitration Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's summons for appointment of an arbitrator is premature under section 12 of the Arbitration Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that under section 12 of the Arbitration Act, the process of appointing a sole arbitrator in the event of default by one party is governed by party autonomy. The non-defaulting party is entitled to appoint a sole arbitrator after giving notice, and only if the defaulting party applies to set aside that appointment does the High Court become involved. The court does not have original jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator in such circumstances, and the applicant's invocation of section 12(9) was misplaced. As the applicant had not exhausted the statutory process, the application was premature and could not succeed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Originating Summons dated 12th March 2020 is dismissed.
  • There shall be no order as to costs.