The High Court has affirmed the Copyright Tribunal's authority to hear and determine disputes over musical ownership, royalties and infringement, ruling that parties must first exhaust the statutory dispute resolution process before seeking intervention from the courts.
In a ruling delivered on November 9, 2026, Justice T.W. Souoya struck out an application by Black Market Records LLC and Cedric Singleton seeking to challenge proceedings involving Kenyan musicians Moses Otieno Ojwang, popularly known as Fathermoh, and Harry Otieno Adoyo, alias Harry Craze.
The judge held that the Copyright Tribunal is the specialised statutory forum mandated to handle disputes involving copyright ownership, infringement and compensation.
"Based on the foregoing, where a statute provides a clear procedure and specialised forum for redress, that statutory procedure must be strictly adhered to before escalating to the High Court," Justice Souoya ruled.
The court found that Black Market Records LLC and Singleton had failed to obtain an exemption under Section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act before approaching the High Court instead of pursuing the available mechanisms before the Copyright Tribunal.
The legislation requires parties to exhaust available internal or tribunal-based dispute resolution mechanisms before seeking judicial review, unless the court grants an exemption.
Justice Souoya also pointed to procedural shortcomings in the application, including the failure by Singleton to file a verifying affidavit as required under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
The court further questioned the legal capacity of the entity that instituted the proceedings, noting that records from California showed that the company identified as Entity No. 199909510037 was under official suspension.
It also found that no valid assignment of rights arising from a November 9, 2019 agreement had been presented to establish that an active legal entity owned the disputed rights.
"These defects are not technical in nature. They go to jurisdiction, standing, and compliance with mandatory procedural requirements," the judge stated.
The dispute involves two claims filed before the Copyright Tribunal by Fathermoh and Harry Craze against Black Market Records LLC and other parties.
In his supporting affidavit, Harry Craze stated that he had filed a claim on May 11, 2026, against Black Market Records LLC, Studio Black Market Records Ltd and Singleton over an agreement dated November 9, 2019, and musical works including "Matopare", "Luku Ni Pyam" and "Diglo".
The proceedings also involve a separate claim by Fathermoh, identified as Copyright Tribunal Claim E001 of 2026, while Harry Craze's case is registered as Claim E002 of 2026.
Black Market Records and Singleton had sought to have the tribunal proceedings quashed, arguing that the High Court had previously assumed jurisdiction over the disputed musical works.
However, the musicians opposed the application, arguing that the applicants had failed to disclose material information, including notices of appeal lodged on September 11, 2026, and the status of related commercial proceedings.
The court agreed that material information had been withheld when the initial orders were obtained, finding that the non-disclosure affected its decision to grant the orders.
Consequently, Justice Souoya set aside the ex parte orders issued on September 29, 2026, which had suspended proceedings before the tribunal.
The judge directed the Copyright Tribunal to proceed with hearing and determining both claims in accordance with the law.
The court also ordered Black Market Records LLC and Singleton to jointly and severally pay the costs of the applications to Fathermoh and Harry Craze.
The decision clears the way for the tribunal to determine the underlying copyright disputes.