Case ID:168983
Parties: None
Date Delivered: None
Case Type: None
Court: None
Judges: None
Citation: None
Export Trading Company Limited v Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries & another [2021] eKLR
Case Metadata
Case Number:
Miscellaneous 1143 of 2020
Parties:
Export Trading Company Limited v Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries & Attorney General
Date Delivered:
20 Jan 2021
Case Class:
Civil
Court:
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)
Case Action:
Ruling
Judge(s):
Alfred Mabeya
Citation:
Export Trading Company Limited v Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries & another [2021] eKLR
Court Division:
Civil
County:
Nairobi
Disclaimer:
The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION
MISC. NO. 1143 OF 2020
EXPORT TRADING COMPANY LIMITED ........................... APPLICANT
VERSUS
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, LIVESTOCK AND
FISHERIES ................................................................... 1
ST
RESPONDENT
ATTORNEY GENERAL ................................................ 2
ND
RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. Before me is a Summons in Chambers brought under
section 36 of the Arbitration Act and Rule 9 of the Arbitration Rules, 1997.
The applicant sought leave to enforce the Final Arbitral Award made and published on 4/9/2020. It also sought the costs of the application.
2. The application was grounded upon the grounds set out in the body thereof and the supporting affidavit of
Giles Lewis
sworn on 13/10/2020. These were that; there was an arbitral process that had been undertaken under the auspices of the Nairobi Centre for International Arbitration; that an Award thereof had been made and published by the sole Arbitrator on 4/9/2020. That in the premises, the applicant sought that the same be enforced as a decree of this Court.
3. The application was served upon the Attorney General on 19/10/2020. He never appeared and the application was therefore undefended.
4. I have considered the application.
Section 36 of the Arbitration Act, 2015
provides: -
“(1) A domestic arbitral award, shall be recognized as binding and, upon application in writing to the High Court, shall be enforced subject to this section and section 37”.
(2) …
(3) Unless the High Court otherwise orders, the party relying on an arbitral award or applying for its enforcement must furnish –
(a) the original arbitral award or a duly certified copy of it; and
(b) the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy of it”.
5. On record, there is a copy of the Final Award published on 4/9/2020. The applicant did not produce the copy of the arbitral agreement in terms of
section 36 (3) (b) of the Arbitration Act, 2015.
However, this Court is of the view that the same is not necessary because, from the documents filed and presented to the Arbitral Tribunal, the contract between the parties contained an arbitral agreement in
Article 12
thereof. Accordingly, the applicant is excused for not having produced the Arbitral agreement in terms of
section 36(3)(b) of the Arbitration Act.
6. Having considered the entire record, I am satisfied that; the parties entered into some contract in or about 2017. The contract contained an arbitral agreement. A dispute as to the performance of the said contract arose and the matter was referred to arbitration in accordance with the contract between the parties.
7. I am further satisfied that at the Arbitral Tribunal, the parties were granted an equal opportunity to present their respective cases. The respondents, in their usual callous manner and as is common knowledge of taking matters for granted, failed to present their case. The Arbitral Tribunal found as a fact that; there was a contract between the parties, the applicant performed its part, the respondents made part payment thereof but failed to pay the entire contract sum.
8. Accordingly, by a Final Award published on 4/9/2020, the Arbitral Tribunal found for the applicant against the respondents. By that Award, the 2
nd
respondent is to pay the applicant an outstanding balance in the sum of Kshs. 518,561,329/50 together with interest thereon at 12% per annum from January, 2018 until payment in full. The 2
nd
respondent was also condemned to pay the costs of the arbitration. It is only regrettable that the public is to shoulder the unnecessary costs and interest which could have been avoided had the 2
nd
respondent been properly advised.
9. The Award having been made after due process and in accordance with the law, I find the application to be meritorious and I allow the same as prayed.
It is so ordered.
DATED
and
DELIVERED
at Nairobi this
20
th
day of
January, 2021
.
A. MABEYA, FCIArb
JUDGE