[2002] KEHC 627 (KLR)
The court held that service by registered post to the 1st defendant's registered postal address was proper under Order 5 rule 2(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules, given the process server's inability to effect personal service on the company's officers. However, the court found that it was improper to proceed to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 627 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Charles Mugambi M’Buthia; Defendant: Arusha Express Company Limited; Defendant: James Mwarare Koigi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 824 of ??
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Service and Hearing Sequence
- Outcome
- Matter to be listed for hearing only after the 2nd defendant is duly served; interlocutory judgment against the 1st defendant does not entitle plaintiff to proceed to assessment of damages at this stage.
- Legal Topics
- Service of Process, Interlocutory Judgment, Wrongful Death, Assessment of Damages
- 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
Charles Mugambi M’Buthia
Plaintiff
Arusha Express Company Limited
Defendant
James Mwarare Koigi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Service and Hearing Sequence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether service of summons on the 1st defendant by registered post was proper under the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 2 Whether interlocutory judgment could be entered against one defendant and the case proceed to assessment of damages before the other defendant is served or heard.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that service by registered post to the 1st defendant's registered postal address was proper under Order 5 rule 2(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules, given the process server's inability to effect personal service on the company's officers. However, the court found that it was improper to proceed to assessment of damages against the 1st defendant before the 2nd defendant had been served and given an opportunity to defend the suit. Order 9A rule 6 requires that where there are multiple defendants, the suit must be heard simultaneously, and interlocutory judgment against one does not entitle the plaintiff to proceed to assessment of damages until all defendants have been served...
Court Disposition
Matter to be listed for hearing only after the 2nd defendant is duly served; interlocutory judgment against the 1st defendant does not entitle plaintiff to proceed to assessment of damages at this stage.
Orders
- The matter is to be listed for hearing only after the 2nd defendant is duly served and given an opportunity to enter a defence.
- A copy of this ruling is to be made available to all deputy registrars and executive officers who fixed the matter for hearing contrary to Order 9A rule 6 Civil Procedure Rules.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 824 OF 2000
CHARLES MUGAMBI M’BUTHIA ………………………… PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ARUSHA EXPRESS COMPANY LIMITED …………… DEFENDNAT
RULING
Defendant No. 1, Arusha express Company Limited liability Company who have been brought to court together with one James Mwarare Koigi by Charles Mugambi M’Burithia the Plaintiff herein for the wrongful death of one N. M. Mugambi who is said to have been knocked down by the defendants vehicle.
This action in tout was filed on the 26. 5.00. Efforts to trace the 1st, defendant, a limited liability company proved fruitless. The process server did a search at the Registrar of Companies office at Sheria House. He found the registered offices of the said company and a box number of 28807 Nairobi.
The company’s office was closed. He was directed to Mombasa where the company offices too were closed. Two months later the process server served the summons to enter appearance, the plaint through the 1st defendant’s postal address.
There was Interlocutory judgment entered or 7. 6.02 against the 1st defendant by the principal Deputy Registrar. The executive officer who has been informed on numerous occasions gave dates for hearing f this suit before the High Court. This is the task of the Registrar of the High Court of Kenya.
By giving the said dates it contravened Order 9S r 6 Civil Procedure which I shall mention at a later stage. I requested the advocate to address me on the issue as to why he did not seek an alternative or substitute service from court. The advocate stated that Order V r 2 Civil Procedure permits him to service though registered post where the defendant cannot be traced.
As a rule serve or a corporation must be on the “secretary to the company the director or other Principal Officer of the corporation.”
Basically what this means is that here should as far as possible be personal service on the said officers. Order 5 r 2 (b) Civil Procedure nonetheless reads,
“f the process server is unable to find any of the officers of the corporation mentioned in rule 2 (a) (above0 by leaving it at the registered office of the corporation or sending it by prepaid registered post to the registered postal address of the corporation or of there is no registered office and on registered postal address of the cooperation by leaving it at the place where the cooperation carries on business or by sending it by registered p9st to the last know postal address of the cooperation.”
Thus the process server had duly complied with services although this court would have wished that a more thorough search would have been made. The word Arusha may imply that a sister company may be in another country.
I now turn to Order 9A r 6 Civil procedure. The rules provides that where there are several defendants to a suit and if interlocutory judgment has been entered against one then the plaintiff must await the hearing of the other defendants suit. The plaintiff cannot hear the 1st defendants suit on assessment of damages when the 2nd defendants has not been served nor is he aware of this suit. The case must be heard simultaneously.
I hereby direct that this mater is to be listed fro hearing until the 2nd defendant is duly served and if he wishes to enter his defence.
That a copy of this ruling be made available to all the deputy registrars and to he executive officers who fixed this mater for haring contrary to Order 9A r 6 Civil Procedure.
Dated this 13th day of November 2002 at Nairobi.
M.A. Ang’awa JUDGE.