'
1. During the highlighting of the submissions in relation to the application dated 16.4.25 seeking to set aside the award it became evident to this court that the primary purpose of the setting aside application relates to questions concerning the ownership of the subject properties.
2. Moreover, the setting aside application, in effect, seeks to change ownership of properties, by setting aside the decision of the arbitrator which determined the issue of ownership in favour of the respondent.
3. In my view, based on the above, the application ought to be before the ELC and not this court because the dominant issue and dominant question is in fact, a question of ownership of the property and the determination of this application will effect a change in ownership of the subject properties. Accordingly, based on the above, I find this court has no jurisdiction to deal with the present application.
4. In Supreme Court of Kenya Civil application No 11 of 2016-''Hon (Lady ) Justice Kalpana H Rawal Versus Judicial Service Commission and others in demystifying jurisdiction quoted from the decision in Supreme Court of Nigeria supreme case No 11 of 2012- ''Ocheja Immanuel Dangama – Versus - Hon Atoi Aidoko Aliaswan and 4 others the court stated:
a. “It is settled that jurisdiction is the life blood of any adjudication because a Court or tribunal without jurisdiction is like an animal without blood, which means it is dead. A decision by a Court or tribunal without requisite jurisdiction is a nullity dead on arrival and of no legal effect whatever that is why an issue of jurisdiction is granted and fundamental in adjudication and has to be dealt with first and foremost.”
5. Based on the above, this court ought not take a single further step in relation to the present matter. The orders of the court are as follows:
a. The application is incompetently before this court and the same is struck out with costs.
b. The application seeking recognition and enforcement of the award in question ought to be determined by the same court considering the setting aside application.
c. The file is marked as closed.
'
1. During the highlighting of the submissions in relation to the application dated 16.4.25 seeking to set aside the award it became evident to this court that the primary purpose of the setting aside application relates to questions concerning the ownership of the subject properties.
2. Moreover, the setting aside application, in effect, seeks to change ownership of properties, by setting aside the decision of the arbitrator which determined the issue of ownership in favour of the respondent.
3. In my view, based on the above, the application ought to be before the ELC and not this court because the dominant issue and dominant question is in fact, a question of ownership of the property and the determination of this application will effect a change in ownership of the subject properties. Accordingly, based on the above, I find this court has no jurisdiction to deal with the present application.
4. In Supreme Court of Kenya Civil application No 11 of 2016-''Hon (Lady ) Justice Kalpana H Rawal Versus Judicial Service Commission and others in demystifying jurisdiction quoted from the decision in Supreme Court of Nigeria supreme case No 11 of 2012- ''Ocheja Immanuel Dangama – Versus - Hon Atoi Aidoko Aliaswan and 4 others the court stated:
a. “It is settled that jurisdiction is the life blood of any adjudication because a Court or tribunal without jurisdiction is like an animal without blood, which means it is dead. A decision by a Court or tribunal without requisite jurisdiction is a nullity dead on arrival and of no legal effect whatever that is why an issue of jurisdiction is granted and fundamental in adjudication and has to be dealt with first and foremost.”
5. Based on the above, this court ought not take a single further step in relation to the present matter. The orders of the court are as follows:
a. The application is incompetently before this court and the same is struck out with costs.
b. The application seeking recognition and enforcement of the award in question ought to be determined by the same court considering the setting aside application.
c. The file is marked as closed.
'