SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Radheshyam Transport Ltd v Corporate Business Centre Ltd (Civil Case 303 of 2014) [2015] KEHC 992 (KLR) (Civ) (20 November 2015) (Ruling)

[2015] KEHC 992 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
992
Citation
[2015] KEHC 992 (KLR)
Decided
20 November 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureDefendant's motion for certification of urgency and other ordersCoramJ. K. SERGON
Holding

The motion is well-founded due to the lack of credible service of summons and the absence of a written agreement with an arbitration clause.

Facts

The defendant was served with a summons to enter appearance, but the plaintiff's affidavit of service was challenged due to discrepancies in the signatures. The parties exchanged documents, including an agreement for building works, which contained an arbitration clause.

Issues

  1. Whether service of summons was effected
  2. Whether there is a written contract with an arbitration clause

Reasoning

The court found that the signatures in the affidavits of service were different, creating doubt about the service of summons. The parties exchanged documents, including an agreement for building works, which contained an arbitration clause, but no written agreement was executed.

Outcome

Motion granted in part, costs to be determined in the suit

Orders

  • Certification of urgency
  • Allowance of Murgor & Murgor Advocates to appear on record
  • Stay of execution of judgment, decree, and warrants of attachment and sale
  • Set aside judgment against defendant dated 11th May 2015
  • Stay further proceedings in the suit pending arbitration
  • Referral of dispute to arbitration
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case