[2013] KEHC 6793 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's application for summary judgment did not meet the required threshold because the claim was not clearly particularised and there were inconsistencies in the amounts claimed. The court emphasised that summary judgment is only appropriate in cases where the claim is clear and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 6793 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Daniel Lago Okomo; Defendant: Safari Park Hotel Ltd; Defendant: Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 427 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- REA Ougo
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Pleadings Particularity, Dismissal of Application
- 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
Daniel Lago Okomo
Plaintiff
Safari Park Hotel Ltd
Defendant
Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff's application meets the threshold for summary judgment.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff's claim is sufficiently clear and particularised to warrant summary judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's application for summary judgment did not meet the required threshold because the claim was not clearly particularised and there were inconsistencies in the amounts claimed. The court emphasised that summary judgment is only appropriate in cases where the claim is clear and unambiguous, and where there are no triable issues. Given the lack of clarity in the plaintiff's pleadings and the existence of multiple figures cited, the court determined that this was not a suitable case for summary judgment. The application was therefore dismissed, and the plaintiff was advised to seek legal assistance to properly particularise his claim before proceeding to a...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The plaintiff's application for summary judgment is dismissed.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL DIVISION
CIVIL SUIT NO. 427/2011
DANIEL LAGO OKOMO ..................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SAFARI PARK HOTEL LTD......................................1ST DEFENDANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL.............................................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
The plaintiff/applicant has filed an application for summary judgment dated the 4/6/13. The application was opposed by the respondent. The plaintiffs claim for summary judgment is for a sum of Kshs. 803,508/-. I have with due respect to the applicant tried to understand his claim in the application and I find that what he seek is not clear at all. Summary judgment is given only in the clearest of cases. The plaintiff plaint has details of various claims. As pointed out by the respondents there are 2 figures stated by the plaintiff one of Kshs.803508/- and another of 10221500/-.
This matter as I stated is not a clear case of summary judgment on the 2nd defendant’s grounds they can move the court with an appropriate application to seek what they state at ground No. 3. All in all I find no merit in the plaintiff /applicant application.
The plaintiff should fix his case for hearing. The application is therefore dismissed with no orders as to costs. I also advise the plaintiff that he should seek help from a lawyer or legal body like Kituo Cha Sheria to keep him particularise his claim clearly to enable the court that will hear his case know what his actual claim is. Application is dismissed.
Dated, signed and delivered this 7th Day of November 2013.
R. E OUGO
JUDGE
In the presence of:`
…………………………………………………….…………………Plaintiff
………………………………………………………………………1st defendant
……………………………………………………………..………2nd defendant
………………………………………………………………………Court Clerk