[2015] KEHC 2757 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 2757 (KLR)

The court found that the evidence presented by the applicants failed to meet the high standard required to prove fraud in the entry of the consent order. The affidavit evidence did not name the individual alleged to have acted with improper political interests, nor did it provide sufficient detail to substantiate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 2757 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Daniel Ngoima; Plaintiff: Duncan K. Singi (suing on own behalf and that of Kitui Branch Kenya National Chamber of Commerce & Industry); Defendant: The Kenya National Chamber of Commerce
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Machakos
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 96 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Applications to Set Aside Consent Order and for Summons/apology Orders
Outcome
Both applications dismissed with costs.
Judges
BT Jaden
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Consent Orders, Fraud Allegations, Service of Process, Corporate Governance, Election Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Setting Aside Consent Orders Fraud Allegations Service of Process Corporate Governance Election 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

Daniel Ngoima

Plaintiff

Duncan K. Singi (suing on own behalf and that of Kitui Branch Kenya National Chamber of Commerce & Industry)

Plaintiff

The Kenya National Chamber of Commerce

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Applications to Set Aside Consent Order and for Summons/apology Orders

  1. 1 Whether the consent order entered on 18/5/2012 should be set aside for fraud or lack of proper service.
  2. 2 Whether the persons named in the application dated 7/11/2013 should be summoned to court to apologize and correct media statements regarding the court's orders.
  3. 3 Whether the consent order was entered into without authority or in secrecy, thereby excluding interested parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the evidence presented by the applicants failed to meet the high standard required to prove fraud in the entry of the consent order. The affidavit evidence did not name the individual alleged to have acted with improper political interests, nor did it provide sufficient detail to substantiate claims of fraudulent conduct or lack of proper service. The court also noted that the consent order was entered into by mutual agreement of the parties' advocates, and there was no evidence that the order was entered without authority or in secrecy. Regarding the application to summon individuals to court for media statements, the court held that the appropriate procedure for...

Court Disposition

Both applications dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application dated 17/9/2013 seeking to set aside the consent order is dismissed with costs.
  • The application dated 7/11/2013 seeking to summon named individuals to court for apology and correction of media statements is dismissed with costs.