The High Court has ordered a Nairobi-based car dealer and his company to refund Sh3.4 million to a buyer after failing to deliver an Audi Q7 vehicle, turning an arbitral award into an enforceable court decree.
The court ordered Kai & Karo Limited and its director, Joseph Kairu, to pay Fawn Wood Crest Limited the amount, with commercial interest and costs.
The dispute began with an October 8, 2024 agreement for a 2017 model of the Audi Q7 2.0 TFSI Quattro priced at Sh5.8 million. Fawn Wood Crest paid a Sh2.2 million deposit.
The parties later agreed that the dealership would sell the buyer’s Subaru Outback and retain the Sh1.7 million proceeds towards the Audi purchase.
That brought the amount held by Kai & Karo to Sh3.9 million. On October 28, the company said the 2017 model was unavailable and proposed a 2019 Audi Q7 at a revised price of Sh5.9 million.
The parties later signed a deed acknowledging the Sh3.9 million and agreeing it would be applied to the replacement vehicle.
The deed required a refund if procurement failed. A fresh purchase agreement followed on November 21.
The vehicle was never delivered, according to Fawn Wood Crest’s Muigai Githu.
The respondents refunded Sh500,000 on May 2, 2025, leaving Sh3.4 million unpaid. Fawn Wood Crest invoked the arbitration clause.
Sole arbitrator Job Weloba issued procedural directions and a peremptory order after the respondents failed to appear or file a response. The proceedings continued in their absence, and he published a final award on February 16, 2026.
The arbitrator ordered Mr Kairu and the car importation company to pay the Sh3.4 million balance, commercial interest, and Sh175,000 in arbitration costs. The buyer then sought High Court recognition under the Arbitration Act.
The judge said the buyer had supplied certified copies of the agreements containing the arbitration clause and the final award.
“The respondents were given effective notice of the arbitral proceedings via their designated contractual email address,” the judge said. He added that the arbitrator had issued “appropriate procedural directions and a peremptory order”.
The judge said no ground for refusing recognition under the Arbitration Act had been advanced or identified. “I am satisfied that the applicant has complied with the requirements of section 36,” he said.
The decree allows the buyer to pursue payment; it does not establish that the money has been recovered.
The court directed the respondents to pay the amount with commercial interest from February 28, 2025, until full payment.
