KENYA Trends and Developments Contributed by: John M. Ohaga, SC and Joy Wanyika, TripleOKLaw Advocates
TripleOKLaw Advocates LLP 5th Floor, Wing C ACK Garden House 1st Ngong Avenue, off Bishop’s Road P. O Box 43170-00100 Nairobi Kenya Tel: +254 709 830 100 Email: tripleoklaw@tripleoklaw.com Web: tripleoklaw.com
Trends and Developments: The Uniqueness of Kenya’s Sports Disputes Tribunal and Why It Matters to the Market Introduction Kenya’s sports industry is increasingly commercial, regulated, and reputation-sensitive. Clubs, leagues, federations, sponsors, athletes, agents and event organisers now operate in an environment where dis - putes can rapidly escalate into business disruption, brand damage and lost competitive opportunities. Against that backdrop, the Sports Disputes Tribunal has emerged as a distinctive institution that is shap - ing how sports conflicts are resolved in Kenya under the Sports Act, No 25 of 2013, and in line with con - stitutional standards under the Constitution of Kenya 2010. The Tribunal’s uniqueness is not simply that it hears sports disputes. Its distinctive value lies in its abil - ity to provide a specialist forum that is quicker and more context-aware than ordinary litigation, while still applying public law values such as fairness, transpar - ency and access to justice. This article highlights the most notable trends in the Tribunal’s recent jurispru - dence and practical approach and why these trends are important to clients doing business in Kenya’s sports market. The commercial reality of sports disputes in Kenya Sports disputes in Kenya rarely remain purely “sport - ing”. Governance contests can affect the validity of elections, the legitimacy of office bearers and the ability of federations to sign contracts or run com - petitions. Employment disputes can interrupt a sea -
son, disrupt squad planning and lead to unexpected financial exposure. Registration and eligibility disputes can determine promotion, relegation, prize money and sponsorship deliverables. These realities make time a critical factor. A dispute that takes months may be commercially equivalent to no remedy at all, especially where the contested event is an election, a transfer window, a league fixture or an athlete’s selection. The Sports Disputes Tribunal is unique because it has built a body of practice that is alive to these timelines, while still anchored in the Sports Act and constitutional safeguards such as the right to a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitu - tion of Kenya 2010 and access to justice under Article 48 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010. A specialist statutory forum with a purposive approach to jurisdiction One of the clearest themes in the Tribunal’s jurispru - dence is a purposive and practical approach to juris - diction under Section 58 of the Sports Act, No 25 of 2013. Rather than treating jurisdiction as a technical trap, the Tribunal tends to ask whether the dispute is genuinely sports-related and whether refusing jurisdiction would undermine access to timely and effective remedies within the sports ecosystem. This approach supports market stability by increasing the predictability that sports disputes will be resolved in a specialist forum rather than drifting into fragmented litigation. This trend is illustrated in Galaxy United FC v Korir & another; Seka FC (Homabay County) & 2 others
200 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook