Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedChamber Summons dated 11th February, 2026 (arbitration cause re ELC Case No. E529 of 2024 interim measures)· [2026] KEELC 4616 (KLR)

Ahmed v Ali & 2 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E058 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4616 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
20 July 2026
MCMbogo C.G.
2,232 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's High Court set aside an arbitrator's decision removing a company from an investment dispute, ruling that fairness required all key parties to take part.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant moved the High Court by chamber summons dated 11th February, 2026 under Sections 3, 7 and 35(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act, Cap 49, Rule 3 of the Arbitration Rules 1997 and Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, seeking a stay of arbitral proceedings before sole arbitrator Samuel Mbiriri, FCIArb and setting aside of the partial award published on 2nd February, 2026, which struck out the 2nd respondent from the arbitration for want of an arbitration agreement. The applicant deposed that he invested USD 1,026,000 with the 1st respondent in the development of Atis Suites in Eastleigh on L.R No. 36/VII/325, for which he was to receive a 38.5% share, and that shares were fraudulently transferred to the 1st respondent's sons. He contended the striking out breached Article 50 fair-hearing rights and conflicted with interim measures issued by Lady Justice T. Murigi in ELC Case No. E529 of 2024. The respondents opposed, denying the court's jurisdiction to review the tribunal's ruling on its own jurisdiction and asserting the 2nd respondent was a stranger to both the investment and mediation agreements. The court framed a single issue: whether it had jurisdiction and ought to set aside the partial award. Guided by Section 35(2) and the public policy threshold in Christ for All Nations, the court nonetheless adopted a broad view of the claim, holding the 2nd respondent a necessary party to the claim for a 38.5% interest. The application was allowed: the partial award was set aside in terms of order (i) thereof, with costs in the cause. (approx. 260 words)

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the High Court should set aside the partial award striking out the 2nd respondent from the arbitral proceedings

Holding

The partial award was set aside because the 2nd respondent is a necessary party for the applicant's claim of a 38.5% beneficial interest to be fairly determined, notwithstanding that the claimant must ordinarily bring himself within Section 35(2).

Reasoning

The court acknowledged the respondents' reliance on Section 35(2)'s narrow grounds and that the applicant could raise his grievances on the final award. However, adopting a broad view of the claim, the court held the 2nd respondent, as the corporate vehicle holding the investment, is the only party able to rebut the claim to 38.5%; fairness therefore required joinder, and order (i) of the partial award was set aside.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant seeking to set aside an arbitral award must bring himself strictly within the grounds in Section 35(2) of the Arbitration Act.
  • An award may be set aside under Section 35(2)(b)(ii) if it is inconsistent with the Constitution or other law, inimical to the national interest, or contrary to justice and morality.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The partial award dated 2nd February, 2026 by the sole arbitrator, Samuel Mbiriri, FCIArb is set aside in terms of order (i) thereof
  2. 2.Costs in the cause
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 3, 7 and 35(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act, Cap 49; Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ahmed v Ali & 2 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E058 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 4616 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Chamber Summons dated 11th February, 2026 (arbitration cause re ELC Case No. E529 of 2024 interim measures). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4616/eng@2026-07-20

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.