1. I have considered the application dated 26 January, 2024, together with the affidavit in support sworn on even date, the replying affidavit sworn in opposition to the same on 15 April 2024, the rival submissions, and the applicable law.
2. The advocate who appeared on the date of hearing stated she could not speak to the application. She did however state that the reason for non- attendance was that there was a power outage on the day.
3. Having considered the affidavits in support and against, and the submissions, I note from the outset that the applicant has failed to attach the order which it seeks to have set aside.
4. Further, the applicant is of the mistaken view that its application was dismissed solely for non-attendance of the advocate at the date of hearing, when in fact, the ruling of the court provided reasons, albeit short reasons that relate to the merits of the Application dated 2nd February, 2022.
5. For example, the said ruling clearly stated that the applicant had failed to comply with section 36 (3) of the Arbitration Act, which is a prerequisite for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.
6. Accordingly, in the event the applicant wishes to challenge the said ruling, to my mind, the present application seeking orders for reinstatement is not the appropriate procedure.
7. Further, it is worth stating, that not only did the applicant failed to attend on the day scheduled for highlighting, but it also failed to file and serve any written submissions in opposition to the Preliminary Objection within the timeline stipulated by the court. Therefore, the preliminary objection was unopposed at the date of highlighting.
8. The present application is therefore misleading in so far as the advocate claims that this was a genuine mistake caused by technical difficulties in accessing the platform because no submissions were on record as at the date of the highlighting. In short, even if the advocate had logged in, his submissions were not on record, and it is likely he or she would not have been able to proceed.
9. Based on the reasons set out above I find that the application is without merit. The same is dismissed with costs.