[2016] KEELC 833 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 833 (KLR)

The court found that it was not clear whether the parties and causes of action in the present suit and Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010 were identical, particularly as the present suit involved additional defendants whose relationship to the first defendant was not established. Furthermore, the existence of Nakuru HCCC...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 833 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Bishop Lawi Imathiu (suing as the trustee of Kenya Young Men’s Christian Association); Defendant: Joseph Mutune Wambui (sued as pastor and trustee of Kenya Association of God “Heavens Gate Worship Centre”) & 11 others
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 141 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit for Being Res Judicata and for Consolidation
Outcome
Application to strike out suit dismissed; order for consolidation granted if other suit is pending; no order as to costs.
Judges
MA Silau
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Consolidation of Suits, Eviction Proceedings, Tenancy Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Res Judicata Consolidation of Suits Eviction Proceedings Tenancy Disputes

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bishop Lawi Imathiu (suing as the trustee of Kenya Young Men’s Christian Association)

Plaintiff

Joseph Mutune Wambui (sued as pastor and trustee of Kenya Association of God “Heavens Gate Worship Centre”) & 11 others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit for Being Res Judicata and for Consolidation

  1. 1 Whether the present suit should be struck out on grounds of res judicata due to the existence of Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the present suit and Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010 involve the same parties and cause of action.
  3. 3 Whether consolidation of the two suits is appropriate in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it was not clear whether the parties and causes of action in the present suit and Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010 were identical, particularly as the present suit involved additional defendants whose relationship to the first defendant was not established. Furthermore, the existence of Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010 was uncertain, as efforts to trace the file were unsuccessful and the pleadings in the present suit suggested it may have been dismissed. In light of these uncertainties, the court held that it would not be appropriate to strike out the present suit on grounds of res judicata. Instead, the court determined that the most just and efficient course was to order...

Court Disposition

Application to strike out suit dismissed; order for consolidation granted if other suit is pending; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • This case is consolidated with Nakuru HCCC No. 123 of 2010 if it is still pending.
  • No orders as to costs on this application.