[2009] KEHC 2170 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 2170 (KLR)

The court found that the amount claimed by the plaintiff was properly due as evidenced by the certificate of taxation, and that the defence filed by the defendant did not challenge the claim or raise any triable issues. In the absence of any opposition or credible defence, the court held that summary judgment was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 2170 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Alex S. Masika; Defendant: Epco Builders Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 372 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff
Judges
PM Mwilu, JW Lessit
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Taxed Costs, Advocate Client Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Taxed Costs Advocate Client Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex S. Masika

Plaintiff

Epco Builders Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Summary Judgment Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment for the taxed sum against the defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the defence raises any triable issues to warrant a full trial.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the amount claimed by the plaintiff was properly due as evidenced by the certificate of taxation, and that the defence filed by the defendant did not challenge the claim or raise any triable issues. In the absence of any opposition or credible defence, the court held that summary judgment was appropriate and entered judgment for the plaintiff for the taxed sum together with costs.

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff in the sum of Kshs.1,191,006.80.
  • Plaintiff awarded costs of the application and of the suit.