[2014] KEHC 7778 (KLR)
This ruling does not determine the substantive merits of the dispute but identifies and frames the issues for trial based on the parties' pleadings, documents, and statements. The court, having considered the parties' inability to agree on a common set of issues, has set out the questions that will guide the trial,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 7778 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Africa Haul Limited; Defendant: CMC Aviation Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 658 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Agreed and Disputed Issues for Determination Prior to Trial
- Outcome
- Issues for determination framed and adopted by the court; matter to proceed to trial on these issues.
- Judges
- A Mabeya, JB Havelock
- Legal Topics
- Maintenance Contracts, Ownership of Aircraft, Delivery of Goods, Damages and Liability, Counterclaims, Costs of Suit
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Africa Haul Limited
Plaintiff
CMC Aviation Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Agreed and Disputed Issues for Determination Prior to Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff was the lawful owner of aircraft registration number 5Y-NYS.
- 2 Whether there was a valid maintenance agreement for the aircraft CESSNA 402B 5Y-NYS between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
- 3 Who delivered aircraft registration 5Y-NYS to the Defendant's workshop and on what terms.
Ratio Decidendi
This ruling does not determine the substantive merits of the dispute but identifies and frames the issues for trial based on the parties' pleadings, documents, and statements. The court, having considered the parties' inability to agree on a common set of issues, has set out the questions that will guide the trial, including ownership of the aircraft, existence and terms of the maintenance agreement, delivery and quality of spare parts, responsibility for delays and losses, entitlement to repair costs and counter-claims, and allocation of costs. The court's approach ensures that all contested matters are clearly delineated for evidentiary hearing and final determination.
Court Disposition
Issues for determination framed and adopted by the court; matter to proceed to trial on these issues.
Orders
- The issues as set out in this ruling shall be the issues for determination at trial.
- Each party to prepare for trial on the basis of the issues identified herein.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
COMMERCIAL & ADMIRALTY DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO.658 OF 2008
AFRICA HAUL LIMITED …................................................... PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
CMC AVIATION LIMITED …................................................. DEFENDANT
RULING
On 11th December, 2012, the parties consented to comply with Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules within 60 days. Thereafter, the matter came up severally for pre-trials but they failed to agree on the issues. Consequently, each party filed its own issues whereby the parties called upon the Court to determine the same.
Having considered the pleadings, bundle of documents, witness statements and individual statement of issues filed by the respective parties these then are the issues for determination;
a) Whether the Plaintiff was the lawful owner of aircraft registration number 5Y-NYS?
b) Whether was there a valid maintenance agreement for the aircraft known as CESSNA 402B 5Y-NYS between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
c) Who delivered aircraft registration 5Y -NYS to the Defendants' workshop and on what terms?
d) Did the Plaintiff offer to supply some spare parts required including fuel tanks and alternators in the repair of 5Y-NYS and were the same delivered to the Defendants? Were the spare parts merchantable and good for the purpose supplied for?
e) Whether the Plaintiff borrowed and supplied spare parts form 3rd parties?
f) Whether there were delays in the repairs and maintenance works of the aircraft 5Y – NYS aforesaid.
g) Whether the Defendant repaired the aircraft 5Y-NYS to acceptable condition or airworthiness as at 28th of August, 2007.
h) Was the aircraft 5Y-NYS ever certified by the Plaintiff's pilot as satisfactory?
i) Who caused the loss of the fuel tank and fuel selectors?
j) Whether the Defendant is entitled to recover costs of the repair of the aircraft 5Y-NYS from the Plaintiff and if so how much?
k) Whether the Plaintiff has suffered any loss as alleged and is the Defendant liable for any of those losses?
l) Whether the Defendant is entitled to judgment upon its counter- claim.
m) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought in the suit.
n) Who is to bear the costs of the suit?
Dated and Signed at Bungoma this 14th day of February, 2014.
A. MABEYA
JUDGE
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this …..4th .............. day of …..March........................ 2014.
J. B. HAVELOCK
JUDGE