[2009] KEHC 1838 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1838 (KLR)

The court found that the defendants and their advocate were properly served with the hearing notice for 23rd September 2002. The advocate for the defendants failed to attend court without sufficient explanation and did not inform his clients of the hearing date. The court held that the plaintiffs were not obliged to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 1838 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Crispin Magima Ndoria; Plaintiff: Dickson Muriuki Ndoria; Plaintiff: Nancy Wambugo Nyamu; Plaintiff: Christopher Mwangi Nyamu; Defendant: Joseph Mwaniki Njagi; Defendant: Raphael Kimaru Njagi; Defendant: Bildad Ihiga Wahome
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 107B of 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment
Outcome
Application to set aside ex parte judgment dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.
Judges
JK Sergon
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment, Service of Hearing Notice, Advocate Negligence, Subdivision of Land
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment Service of Hearing Notice Advocate Negligence Subdivision of Land

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crispin Magima Ndoria

Plaintiff

Dickson Muriuki Ndoria

Plaintiff

Nancy Wambugo Nyamu

Plaintiff

Christopher Mwangi Nyamu

Plaintiff

Joseph Mwaniki Njagi

Defendant

Raphael Kimaru Njagi

Defendant

Bildad Ihiga Wahome

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the ex parte judgment delivered on 22nd November 2002 should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants and their advocate were properly served with the hearing notice for 23rd September 2002.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs were obliged to serve a further hearing notice for 28th October 2002.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendants and their advocate were properly served with the hearing notice for 23rd September 2002. The advocate for the defendants failed to attend court without sufficient explanation and did not inform his clients of the hearing date. The court held that the plaintiffs were not obliged to serve a further hearing notice for the adjourned date of 28th October 2002. The failure of the defendants' advocate to attend court or explain his absence was deemed intentional, and the defendants did not blame their advocate for the default. The court concluded that the clients must bear the consequences of their advocate's negligence. Accordingly, the application to set...

Court Disposition

Application to set aside ex parte judgment dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.

Orders

  • The summons dated 19th June 2003 is dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.