[2024] KEHC 13981 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 13981 (KLR)

The court found that the preliminary objection was premised on the issue of misjoinder, but Order 1, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules expressly provides that no suit shall be defeated by reason of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. The court further found that the applicant had attached the required...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 13981 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Emo Technical Services; Respondent: County Executive Member Finance, County Government Of Homa Bay; Respondent: Chief Finance Officer, County Government Of Homa Bay; Respondent: County Secretary, County Government Of Homa Bay
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review E003 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed with costs
Judges
KW Kiarie
Legal Topics
Preliminary Objection, Misjoinder of Parties, Government Proceedings Act, Public Finance Management, Certificate of Order
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Preliminary Objection Misjoinder of Parties Government Proceedings Act Public Finance Management Certificate of Order

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emo Technical Services

Applicant

County Executive Member Finance, County Government Of Homa Bay

Respondent

Chief Finance Officer, County Government Of Homa Bay

Respondent

County Secretary, County Government Of Homa Bay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the application offends section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act and Order 29 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the application is incompetent due to misjoinder of parties under the Public Finance Management Act.
  3. 3 Whether the suit is fatally defective and undeserving of leave due to alleged procedural defects.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the preliminary objection was premised on the issue of misjoinder, but Order 1, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules expressly provides that no suit shall be defeated by reason of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. The court further found that the applicant had attached the required certificate under section 21 of the Government Proceedings Act, contrary to the respondents' contention. The preliminary objection did not raise a pure point of law that would render the suit incompetent, and therefore lacked basis. The objection was dismissed with costs to the applicant.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The preliminary objection dated 12th April 2024 is dismissed with costs to the applicant.