[2016] KEHC 8477 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 8477 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the grant of interim measures of protection under Section 7 of the Arbitration Act. The contract had lapsed, and there was no evidence of imminent threat to the subject property or justification for the security sought. The dispute over contract performance, payment, and termination is for the arbitrator to determine, not the court. The applicant did not provide evidence of the value of the claim or the respondent's inability to pay any award that may be made in arbitration. The court's intervention is limited to preserving the subject matter, not determining the merits of the dispute. Accordingly, the orders...

Citation
[2016] KEHC 8477 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Vinayak Builders Ltd; Defendant: S & M Properties Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
15 January 2016
Case Number
Civil Suit 618 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Interim Measures Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Application for interim measures of protection dismissed; limited inspection and inventory granted.
Judges
CM Kariuki
Legal Topics
Construction Contracts, Arbitration Interim Measures, Injunctive Relief, Contract Termination, Site Possession, Payment Certificates
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution Construction Contracts Arbitration Interim Measures Injunctive Relief Contract Termination Site Possession +1 more

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vinayak Builders Ltd

Plaintiff

S & M Properties Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Interim Measures Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient cause for the court to grant interim measures of protection under Section 7 of the Arbitration Act pending arbitration.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with possession of the construction site or disposing of the property.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be compelled to deposit Kshs.100 million as security pending arbitration.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the grant of interim measures of protection under Section 7 of the Arbitration Act. The contract had lapsed, and there was no evidence of imminent threat to the subject property or justification for the security sought. The dispute over contract performance, payment, and termination is for the arbitrator to determine, not the court. The applicant did not provide evidence of the value of the claim or the respondent's inability to pay any award that may be made in arbitration. The court's intervention is limited to preserving the subject matter, not determining the merits of the dispute. Accordingly, the orders...

Court Disposition

Application for interim measures of protection dismissed; limited inspection and inventory granted.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted 14 days to conduct inspection, take inventory, and accounts on site for purposes of ascertaining the status quo as pertains to equipment, materials, site office, and work done.
  • Orders of status quo prevailing will lapse after 14 days.