Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards: Public Policy Limitation in Kenya

Abstract

The lack of a concise definition for public policy as a ground for setting aside an arbitral award has complicated the inherent nature and perception of the arbitral process as an expeditious and effective mode of resolution of disputes. It has raised significant questions regarding the role of the state and the courts in the arbitral process which has hitherto been widely viewed as a private process, mainly driven by the parties in a dispute. This thesis explores five closely related questions: First issue: what is the Kenyan law position on enforcement of international arbitral awards domestically? Second issue: what is the international law position on enforcement of international arbitral awards in Kenya? Third issue: what is the definition of public policy and what is its place in the enforcement of international arbitral awards? Fourth issue: how does the public policy consideration affect enforcement in Kenya? Fifth issue: how best can public policy be applied to the enforcement of international arbitral awards? The main aim of the research is to contribute to the development of a bench mark as to what constitutes public policy as a ground for setting aside an international arbitral award. I "suggest that a "concise definition of public policy as a" limitation on enforcement of" international arbitral awards should be adapted to anticipate and promote the certainty and finality of the arbitral process.