Publication:
Placing Kenya on the global platform: an evaluation of the legal framework

Simple item page
dc.creatorGakeri, Jacob K
dc.date01/31/2013
dc.dateThu, 31 Jan 2013
dc.dateThu, 31 Jan 2013 17:04:42
dc.dateMonth: 6 Year: 2011
dc.dateThu, 31 Jan 2013 17:04:42
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-18T11:28:49Z
dc.date.available2015-03-18T11:28:49Z
dc.descriptionInternational Journal of Humanities and Social Science. Vol. 1 No. 6; June2011
dc.descriptionThis paper examines the efficacy of the arbitral law and ADR of Kenya. It postulates that while various reasons may be advanced to justify the poor utilization of the arbitral and ADR processes, the fact that from its inception in 1914, the legal framework disregarded local dispute resolution mechanisms is discernible as the main exposition. Second, domestication of international conventions has not engendered arbitration since it was adopted without the necessary policy framework, modifications or adaptation of the law to local circumstances. The Arbitration Act 1968 illuminates this postulation succinctly. The existing legal framework is oblivious to ADR mechanisms, is replete with omissions and encapsulates no decipherable policy. In a nutshell, the legal regime can neither enhance nor endear arbitration or ADR. There is a compelling case for comprehensive reforms and revision of the Arbitration Act, 1995.
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines the efficacy of the arbitral law and ADR of Kenya. It postulates that while various reasons may be advanced to justify the poor utilization of the arbitral and ADR processes, the fact that from its inception in 1914, the legal framework disregarded local dispute resolution mechanisms is discernible as the main exposition. Second, domestication of international conventions has not engendered arbitration since it was adopted without the necessary policy framework, modifications or adaptation of the law to local circumstances. The Arbitration Act 1968 illuminates this postulation succinctly. The existing legal framework is oblivious to ADR mechanisms, is replete with omissions and encapsulates no decipherable policy. In a nutshell, the legal regime can neither enhance nor endear arbitration or ADR. There is a compelling case for comprehensive reforms and revision of the Arbitration Act, 1995.
dc.identifier
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11071/3435
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Humanities and Social Science
dc.rightsBy agreeing with and accepting this license, I (the author(s), copyright owner or nominated agent) agree to the conditions, as stated below, for deposit of the item (referred to as .the Work.) in the digital repository maintained by Strathmore University, or any other repository authorized for use by Strathmore University. Non-exclusive Rights Rights granted to the digital repository through this agreement are entirely non-exclusive. I understand that depositing the Work in the repository does not affect my rights to publish the Work elsewhere, either in present or future versions. I agree that Strathmore University may electronically store, copy or translate the Work to any approved medium or format for the purpose of future preservation and accessibility. Strathmore University is not under any obligation to reproduce or display the Work in the same formats or resolutions in which it was originally deposited. SU Digital Repository I understand that work deposited in the digital repository will be accessible to a wide variety of people and institutions, including automated agents and search engines via the World Wide Web. I understand that once the Work is deposited, metadata may be incorporated into public access catalogues. I agree as follows: 1.That I am the author or have the authority of the author/s to make this agreement and do hereby give Strathmore University the right to make the Work available in the way described above. 2.That I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the Work is original, and to the best of my knowledge, does not breach any laws including those relating to defamation, libel and copyright. 3.That I have, in instances where the intellectual property of other authors or copyright holders is included in the Work, gained explicit permission for the inclusion of that material in the Work, and in the electronic form of the Work as accessed through the open access digital repository, or that I have identified that material for which adequate permission has not been obtained and which will be inaccessible via the digital repository. 4.That Strathmore University does not hold any obligation to take legal action on behalf of the Depositor, or other rights holders, in the event of a breach of intellectual property rights, or any other right, in the material deposited. 5.That if, as a result of my having knowingly or recklessly given a false statement at points 1, 2 or 3 above, the University suffers loss, I will make good that loss and indemnify Strathmore University for all action, suits, proceedings, claims, demands and costs occasioned by the University in consequence of my false statement.
dc.subjectArbitration
dc.subjectADR
dc.subjectLegal Framework
dc.subjectKenya
dc.titlePlacing Kenya on the global platform: an evaluation of the legal framework
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Placing Kenya on the global platform- an evaluation of the legal framework.pdf
Size:
611.72 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
SU Scholarly Articles