[2022] KEHC 11330 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 11330 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant's defence was a mere general denial without any specific contestation of the plaintiff's claim for outstanding freight charges. The defendant failed to attend the hearing or respond to the application, and correspondence showed the defendant acknowledged the debt. The court held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 11330 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: DB Schenker Limited; Defendant: Mara EPZ Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Commercial Case E668 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence and for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff; defence struck out; summary judgment entered for the plaintiff for the sums claimed, with interest and costs.
Judges
JN Mulwa
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Striking Out Defence, Liquidated Claims, Sham Defence
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Striking Out Defence Liquidated Claims Sham Defence

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DB Schenker Limited

Plaintiff

Mara EPZ Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence and for Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's defence raises any triable issues or is a sham warranting striking out.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment for the liquidated sums claimed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's defence was a mere general denial without any specific contestation of the plaintiff's claim for outstanding freight charges. The defendant failed to attend the hearing or respond to the application, and correspondence showed the defendant acknowledged the debt. The court held that the defence raised no triable issues and was a sham, thus warranting its striking out. Consequently, the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment for the liquidated sums claimed, as there was no genuine dispute requiring a trial. The court exercised its discretion under Order 2 rule 15 and Order 10 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules to strike out the defence and enter...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff; defence struck out; summary judgment entered for the plaintiff for the sums claimed, with interest and costs.

Orders

  • The defence filed by the defendant is struck out.
  • Judgment is entered for the plaintiff against the defendant for USD 199,202.22, GBP 2,268.40, and KES 150,000.