[2012] KEHC 4109 (KLR)
The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the applicants regarding the competence of the firm of Oundu & Makori required formalization through a properly filed application. This would ensure that the respondents' counsel could adequately respond to the allegations, particularly concerning any...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 4109 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Dishon Mareko Mwangine; Applicant: Nyaga Burana; Applicant: Naaman Ireri Sigana; Applicant: Ezekiel Ndara; Applicant: Gilbert Kiura Mathoroko; Respondent: Faustino Njeru Njoka; Respondent: Francis Njeru Nyaga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 52 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Representation and Competence of Counsel
- Outcome
- Preliminary objection not determined on merits; directions issued for formal application and further submissions.
- Legal Topics
- Preliminary Objection, Competence of Counsel, Representation of Parties
- 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
Dishon Mareko Mwangine
Applicant
Nyaga Burana
Applicant
Naaman Ireri Sigana
Applicant
Ezekiel Ndara
Applicant
Gilbert Kiura Mathoroko
Applicant
Faustino Njeru Njoka
Respondent
Francis Njeru Nyaga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Representation and Competence of Counsel
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the firm of Oundu & Makori is competent to appear for the respondents given the possible conflict of interest.
- 2 Whether there is evidence of dismissal of appeals by the Court of Appeal as claimed by respondents' counsel.
- 3 How to address the issue of deceased parties in the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the applicants regarding the competence of the firm of Oundu & Makori required formalization through a properly filed application. This would ensure that the respondents' counsel could adequately respond to the allegations, particularly concerning any potential conflict of interest and the status of the appeals. The court also noted the absence of documentary evidence supporting the respondents' claim that the appeals had been dismissed by the Court of Appeal. The judge directed that the applicants file and serve a formal application within 21 days and that both parties address the issue of deceased parties in the proceedings. The...
Court Disposition
Preliminary objection not determined on merits; directions issued for formal application and further submissions.
Orders
- Applicants to file and serve a formal application within 21 days.
- Respondents' counsel to file an adequate response upon service.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT EMBU
Civil Appeal 52 of 1996
DISHON MAREKO MWANGINE …….....…………….……….……1ST APPLICANT
NYAGA BURANA ……………………….…………………………..2ND APPLICANT
NAAMAN IRERI SIGANA ………….....…………………………….3RD APPLICANT
EZEKIEL NDARA ………………….…..…………………………….4TH APPLICANT
GILBERT KIURA MATHOROKO …..………......…………………..5TH APPLICANT
VERSUS
FAUSTINO NJERU NJOKA………….…………………………1ST RESPONDENT
FRANCIS NJERU NYAGA …………….………………………2ND RESPONDENT
(AN APPEAL FROM THE RULING DELIVERED ON 28TH JUNE 1996 BY HON. N.H. OUNDU - RM AT SIAKAGO RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7 OF 1995 & NO. 1 OF 1996 CONSO21LIDATED)
R U L I N G
When the application dated 16/11/2004 came for hearing on 24/4/2012 Mr. Wandati for Applicants raised a preliminary objection. The issues he raised touched on the competence of the firm of Oundu & Makori appearing for Respondents.
After perusal of the file I was not able to see the orders from the Court of Appeal dismissing any appeals filed there as indicated by M/s Makori.
I have however noted that the original Ruling which gave rise to the consolidated Appeals in the High Court was by one N.H. Oundu. I do not know if he is the same person practicing as Oundu & Makori & Associates or the one who was with Indeche & Associates.
In brief I direct that Mr. Wandati files a formal application so that an adequate response is filed by the Respondents’ Counsel. The application should be filed and served within 21 days. Counsels should also address the issue of the deceased parties as soon as possible.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT EMBU THIS 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2012
H.I. ONG’UDI
JUDGE
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
NJOROGE FOR MUTUA FOR APPLICANTS
MR. IGATI FOR M/S MAKORI FOR RESPONDENTS
C/C - NJUE