Esther Ngondu Ndeti & another v Cecilia Situmai Ndeti & another [2017] KEELC 1947 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that a family's 1986 elders' land award is still enforceable today, because there is no deadline for turning such an award into a court judgment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the application for judgment on the arbitration award is barred by section 4(1)(c) of the Limitation of Actions Act
The bar does not apply because the award was not made under the Arbitration Act, which the Act's definition of 'award' requires
Section 2(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act defines an award as one made for the purposes of the Arbitration Act or a foreign award. The award here was rendered by a court-referred panel under Order XLV of the repealed Civil Procedure Rules, not under the Arbitration Act. The court endorsed Munyao J's holding that section 4(1) applies only to awards made under the Arbitration Act.
Whether section 4(4) of the Limitation of Actions Act (12-year bar on actions on judgments) defeats the application
It does not, since no judgment exists on record and the application seeks entry of judgment on the award, not enforcement of a judgment
The judgment irregularly entered by the Deputy Registrar on 9th February 2006 was set aside on 28th September 2006. After setting aside, the parties reverted to the position of an award filed and read to parties but with no judgment in existence. The 12-year limitation for enforcement of judgments therefore has no application to a request for judgment in terms of the award.
Whether the court can extend time limited by a statute
The issue did not fall for determination because the application was not time barred
Having found no limitation period applies either under the Civil Procedure Rules or the Limitation of Actions Act, the court held extension of time was unnecessary and declined to determine the defendants' argument on the court's power to extend statutory time limits.
Legal principles established
#- The Limitation of Actions Act definition of 'award' confines section 4(1) to awards made under the Arbitration Act; it does not apply to awards made under Order XLV of the Civil Procedure Rules
- Neither Order XLV rule 17(1) of the repealed Civil Procedure Rules nor Order 46 rule 18(1) of the 2010 Rules prescribes a time limit for requesting judgment in accordance with an arbitration award
- Where a judgment entered on an award has been set aside, an application for judgment on the award is not an enforcement of judgment and section 4(4) of the Limitation of Actions Act does not apply
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants in accordance with the arbitrators' award dated 13th May 1986, filed in court and read to parties on 18th September 1986 (prayer 2 of the amended application dated 4th August 2014)
- 2.Plaintiffs awarded the costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction under sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; application under Order 46 rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 and Part III and section 45 of the Limitation of Actions Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Esther Ngondu Ndeti & another v Cecilia Situmai Ndeti & another [2017] KEELC 1947 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1947/eng@2017-07-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.