The Court of Appeal has dismissed an urgent application seeking to halt the enforcement of a ruling by the Environment and Land Court (ELC) in a high-stakes property dispute involving Elite Westlands Limited, Vaal Real Estate Limited, and William Kanya Kiama.
The application, filed on 22nd November 2024, sought to stay the court’s order to enforce an arbitral award related to the sale of a Nairobi apartment.
The dispute arose from a sale agreement for a one-bedroom apartment on LR No. 209/2144/1 in Nairobi, entered into in August 2021.
After allegations of breach by the respondent, arbitration proceedings were initiated, culminating in an award favoring the respondent, including a refund of Kshs. 1.8 million and damages.
The applicants challenged the award, arguing it was against public policy and irregular, prompting the lower court to dismiss their application and uphold the award.
In their appeal before the Court of Appeal, the applicants argued that the trial judge failed to consider certain documents, including the Conditions of Sale and the Agreement of Sale, and that the award was irregular and contrary to public policy.
They contended that the arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction by relying on forged documents and that the award was unjust.
Senior Counsel Mr. Allen Gichuhi, representing the applicants, emphasized that the award was inconsistent with Kenya’s public policy, citing irregularities and violations of legal standards. He urged the Court to grant leave to appeal and stay enforcement, asserting that executing the award would cause irreparable harm to his clients.
However, the respondent’s counsel, Mr. Wanyama Wanyama, opposed the application, arguing that the applicants failed to demonstrate any substantial grounds for stay or appeal. He maintained that the lower court correctly applied the law and that the arbitral process was conducted properly.
Delivering the ruling on 30th May 2025, Justice Gatembu Kairu dismissed the application, stating that the applicants had not provided sufficient evidence to justify a stay of execution.
The Court emphasized that the arbitral award was within the law and did not contravene public policy, and that the application lacked merit.
