Adam v Japan International Co-operation Agency (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 559 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 2986 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court converted an arbitral award into an enforceable judgment, confirming that vague objections cannot block enforcement.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Notice of Preliminary Objection was merited
It failed because it did not raise pure points of law and would require scrutiny of the arbitral award; objections to an award should be raised through proper pleadings, not a preliminary objection.
Relying on Mukisa Biscuit, a preliminary objection must be a pure point of law assuming the facts pleaded are correct. The respondent's grounds required the court to go into the details of the arbitral award to ascertain them, making the objection improper; it amounted in substance to an appeal against the award filed in the wrong manner.
Whether the Grounds of Opposition were merited
They failed because they included factual averments that should have been in a Replying Affidavit.
Following Kennedy Otieno Odiyo, grounds of opposition address only issues of law. The respondent's grounds contained general averments and factual matters properly addressed in a Replying Affidavit, and therefore did not respond adequately to the application.
Whether the application for recognition and enforcement was merited
It was allowed; the applicant failed to prove any section 37 ground for refusal, and the parties had voluntarily submitted to arbitration.
Section 36(1) requires recognition and enforcement of a domestic award subject to section 37. The respondent alleged the award dealt with matters beyond the reference but adduced no proof. Objections about jurisdiction and employment relationship were overtaken by the parties' voluntary submission to arbitration.
Legal principles established
#- A domestic arbitral award shall be recognised as binding and enforced upon application to the High Court, subject to sections 36 and 37 of the Arbitration Act
- An arbitral award is final and binding and there is no recourse against it otherwise than as provided in the Arbitration Act
- Objections to an arbitral award premised on facts requiring examination of the award are not suitable for determination by way of preliminary objection; the proper course is filing appropriate pleadings
- A party resisting enforcement under section 37 must tender proof of the grounds relied upon
Court orders
#- 1.That the final award prepared by Mr Kenneth Akide, SC on the June 20, 2023 be and is hereby recognized and adopted as a Judgement of this Court and applicant be granted leave to execute the same as judgment of this honourable court
- 2.Each party to meet their costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 36 of the Arbitration Act (application to recognize and enforce a domestic arbitral award)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Adam v Japan International Co-operation Agency (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 559 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 2986 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2986/eng@2023-11-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.