[2012] KEHC 4943 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 4943 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant brought the application for stay of proceedings after entering appearance, contrary to Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act. Furthermore, the applicant's conduct, including denying the existence of a dispute and questioning the completeness of the MOU, demonstrated a lack of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEHC 4943 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Stepup Holdings (K) Limited; Defendant: Mt. Kenya University
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
27 January 2012
Case Number
Civil Suit 245 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
SP Ouko
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreements, Stay of Proceedings, Memorandum of Understanding, Jurisdiction of Court
Source Language
english
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Arbitration Agreements Stay of Proceedings Memorandum of Understanding Jurisdiction of Court

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stepup Holdings (K) Limited

Plaintiff

Mt. Kenya University

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings should be stayed pending arbitration as per the MOU.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay was brought in accordance with Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was ready and willing to proceed with arbitration at the commencement of proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant brought the application for stay of proceedings after entering appearance, contrary to Section 6(1) of the Arbitration Act. Furthermore, the applicant's conduct, including denying the existence of a dispute and questioning the completeness of the MOU, demonstrated a lack of readiness and willingness to proceed with arbitration at the commencement of proceedings. As a result, the applicant lost the right to rely on the arbitration clause, and the application for stay was dismissed. The applicant, having submitted to the jurisdiction of the court, must proceed with the litigation.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for stay of proceedings pending arbitration is dismissed.
  • The applicant shall pay the costs of the application.