RATIONALE
The decision of the court rested on the importance of the Arbitration Act which is an act that seeks to bring finality to the disputes of the parties. As a result, the High Court could not act as a Court of Appeal for arbitral matters, reviewing the reasoning and decision of an arbitrator without cause. Consequently, the awards of arbitrators are also not subject to challenge unless they manifest the grounds for an application to setting aside.
CASE RELEVANCE
Section 35 (2)(a)(iv) provides that an award may be set aside where an arbitrator deals with matters that are beyond the scope of issues that the parties referred to arbitration. However, for a party to succeed in pleading this ground, they must illustrate that the arbitrator went on a frolic of their own when issuing the award.
Section 35 (2)(b)(ii) allows for a party to approach the High Court to set aside an award where it violates public policy. Nonetheless, they must prove that the award discloses at least one of the elements of violation of public policy which includes inconsistency with the Constitution of Kenya or other written or unwritten laws, harm to the national interest of Kenya or contrariety to justice and morality
