[2011] KEHC 961 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 961 (KLR)

The court found that there was no suit properly before it as the file from Kerugoya had not been transferred to Embu, and thus there was nothing to dismiss in Miscellaneous Application No. 15 of 2008. Furthermore, the suit by the 1st plaintiff had abated due to failure to substitute within the prescribed period...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 961 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Cyrus Nyaga Kabute; Plaintiff: Silas Njagi Njue; Applicant: Fredrick Nyaga David; Applicant: Francis Njeru David; Applicant: Leonard Kathumu Karani; Applicant: John Kabute Kimotho
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 15 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Abatement of Suit, Transfer of Suit
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Abatement of Suit Transfer of Suit

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cyrus Nyaga Kabute

Plaintiff

Silas Njagi Njue

Plaintiff

Fredrick Nyaga David

Applicant

Francis Njeru David

Applicant

Leonard Kathumu Karani

Applicant

John Kabute Kimotho

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether the suit has abated due to the death of the 1st plaintiff and failure to substitute within the prescribed time.
  3. 3 Whether there is a suit properly before the court for dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no suit properly before it as the file from Kerugoya had not been transferred to Embu, and thus there was nothing to dismiss in Miscellaneous Application No. 15 of 2008. Furthermore, the suit by the 1st plaintiff had abated due to failure to substitute within the prescribed period after his death. The court directed counsel to confirm the status of the Kerugoya file and make any necessary applications in the appropriate file, if and when transferred. The application for dismissal was therefore dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for dismissal for want of prosecution is dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.