[2009] KEHC 2798 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 2798 (KLR)

The court found that the omission in the original judgment regarding the period for which repatriation expenses and wages were awarded constituted an accidental slip. The slip rule, as articulated in the English Civil Procedure Rules, grants the court inherent power to correct such errors to ensure its orders...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 2798 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dominador Balon and 9 others; Defendant: The Owners of the Motor Ship 'Royal Star'
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Admiralty Claim 2 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Admiralty Claim / Ruling on Application to Amend Judgment
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Slip Rule, Amendment of Judgment, Discretion of Court, Repatriation Expenses, Wages Claim, Costs of Application
Source Language
en
Admiralty and Maritime Civil Procedure Slip Rule Amendment of Judgment Discretion of Court Repatriation Expenses Wages Claim Costs of Application

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dominador Balon and 9 others

Plaintiff

The Owners of the Motor Ship 'Royal Star'

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Admiralty Claim / Ruling on Application to Amend Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the court has discretion to amend its judgment to correct an accidental slip or omission.
  2. 2 Whether the slip rule applies to admiralty matters as in ordinary civil matters.
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are entitled to the additional sums for repatriation expenses and wages up to 30.9.2008.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the omission in the original judgment regarding the period for which repatriation expenses and wages were awarded constituted an accidental slip. The slip rule, as articulated in the English Civil Procedure Rules, grants the court inherent power to correct such errors to ensure its orders accurately reflect its intention. The court was satisfied that the applicants had identified the mistake and properly set out the required correction. There being no objection from the respondent and the application being meritorious, the court exercised its discretion to amend the judgment to include the additional sums for the extended period and awarded costs of the application.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • The judgment delivered on 28th July 2008 is amended to provide for judgment in the sum of USD39,256.00.
  • The application without notice is further amended to reflect the additional sum of USD24,994.40 plus costs of USD1,100.