[2018] KEELC 3558 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3558 (KLR)

The court found that the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit was premature and procedurally improper because the mandatory notice to show cause was not served on the parties as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The suit had been in court only three months prior to dismissal, and there was no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3558 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Abdi Kadir Hussein; Defendant: Moses Kipkurui Koros; Defendant: Another (unnamed); Interested Party: Abdi Kkadir Hussein & 4 Others
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 417 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order and Reinstate Suit
Outcome
Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; suit reinstated.
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Notice to Show Cause, Order 17 Rule 2, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Reinstatement of Suit Notice to Show Cause Order 17 Rule 2 Procedural Fairness

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdi Kadir Hussein

Plaintiff

Moses Kipkurui Koros

Defendant

Another (unnamed)

Defendant

Abdi Kkadir Hussein & 4 Others

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Dismissal Order and Reinstate Suit

  1. 1 Whether the order dismissing the plaintiff's suit for want of prosecution should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the court complied with the requirement to issue notice to show cause before dismissal under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit was premature and procedurally improper because the mandatory notice to show cause was not served on the parties as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The suit had been in court only three months prior to dismissal, and there was no evidence of notice being issued or served. The court concluded that the requirements for dismissal for want of prosecution were not met, and therefore set aside the dismissal order and reinstated the suit for hearing.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; suit reinstated.

Orders

  • The order of 27th February 2015 dismissing the plaintiff's suit is set aside.
  • The plaintiff's suit is reinstated for hearing.