← All Authorities
United States setting asidecostspublic policy

Ongata Works Limited v Tatu City Ltd.

Ongata Works Limited v Tatu City Limited (Commercial Arbitration Cause E038 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 1916 (KLR)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtHigh Court of Kenya (Commercial and Tax Division)
Year2025
StatusPersuasive authority

Key Principle

On an application under section 35(2)(b)(ii) of the Kenyan Arbitration Act, an arbitral award of costs may be set aside as contrary to public policy where the costs are manifestly excessive, punitive and unreasonable in proportion to the substantive award. (Note: corpus jurisdiction tag 'us' is incorrect; this is a Kenyan decision.)

Area of Law

General

Related Cases

Klein v. Martin 607 U. S. 213 (2026)
Ellingburg v. United States 607 U.S. ___ (2026)
Inc. v. Palmquist 607 U.S. 421 (2026)

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Ongata Works Limited v Tatu City Ltd. and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Ongata Works Limited v Tatu Ci...