[2021] KEHC 8164 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 8164 (KLR)

The court found that there was an error apparent on the face of the record in its ruling of 7th February 2020, specifically regarding the identification of the units excluded from the statutory power of sale. The court relied on the documentary evidence annexed to the plaint and the parties' consent to determine the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 8164 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Abdikadir Arab Mohamud; Plaintiff: Mohammed Issa Bare; Defendant: First Community Bank
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 154 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Correct Error Apparent on the Face of the Record
Outcome
Application allowed; previous order amended to correct errors in identification of excluded units.
Judges
MW Muigai
Legal Topics
Correction of Judgment, Statutory Power of Sale, Bona Fide Purchasers, Consent Orders, Clerical Errors
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Correction of Judgment Statutory Power of Sale Bona Fide Purchasers Consent Orders Clerical Errors

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdikadir Arab Mohamud

Plaintiff

Mohammed Issa Bare

Plaintiff

First Community Bank

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Correct Error Apparent on the Face of the Record

  1. 1 Whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record in the court's ruling of 7th February 2020 regarding the identification of units excluded from the statutory power of sale.
  2. 2 Whether the court should amend its previous order to accurately reflect the correct unit numbers and parties' consent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was an error apparent on the face of the record in its ruling of 7th February 2020, specifically regarding the identification of the units excluded from the statutory power of sale. The court relied on the documentary evidence annexed to the plaint and the parties' consent to determine the correct list of units. Applying Sections 99 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act, the court held that it had the power to correct clerical or accidental errors in its orders to reflect the true intention of the parties and the factual record. The court therefore amended Order 4 of its previous ruling to accurately list the units to be excluded from the statutory power of sale,...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; previous order amended to correct errors in identification of excluded units.

Orders

  • Order 4 of the ruling of 7th February 2020 is amended to exclude Flat Numbers/Units 101,102,104,202,204,301,302,304,402 & 404 purchased by bona fide third parties and Units G1, G2, G3 & G4 belonging to the plaintiffs from the statutory power of sale.