[2017] KEELC 3105 (KLR)
The court found that no sufficient cause was shown to prevent dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. The mere assertion that the plaintiff was sick did not excuse the failure of her advocate to take any procedural steps as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court emphasized that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 3105 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Enid Njagi Marete; Defendant: Sister Cianthuni Munene
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 90 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Case Management, Delay in Prosecution
- 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
Enid Njagi Marete
Plaintiff
Sister Cianthuni Munene
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether sufficient cause was shown to prevent dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff's illness constituted a valid reason for the delay in prosecuting the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that no sufficient cause was shown to prevent dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. The mere assertion that the plaintiff was sick did not excuse the failure of her advocate to take any procedural steps as required by Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court emphasized that the responsibility to prosecute a suit lies with both the party and their advocate, and that procedural steps could have been taken to avoid dismissal. In the absence of such steps or a satisfactory explanation, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CASE NO 90 OF 2017
FORMERLY MERU CIVIL CASE NO. 144 OF 2003
ENID NJAGI MARETE…………......PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
SISTER CIANTHUNI MUNENE….DEFENDANT
RULING
1. Parties were to show cause on 15. 10. 2015 why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. This was not done.
2. The matter was fixed for 26. 11. 2015 where the parties were to appear before the ELC, Judge at Meru to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. They did not appear before the Judge.
3. Notice was issued for the parties to come to court on 15. 3.2017 to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution in terms of order 17 rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
4. On 15. 3.2017, Mr. Rurige, holding brief for Kiautha Arithi, told the court that the plaintiff had been sick but was now eager to prosecute her case.
5. I find that no cause has been shown to the satisfaction of the court that this suit should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. Even assuming that the statement that the plaintiff had been sick to be correct, this would not have prevented her advocate to take a step or steps as envisaged by order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules which step or steps would have obviated the possible dismissal of the suit.
6. In the circumstances, this suit is dismissed.
7. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 15th day of March, 2017 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Rurige h/b Kiautha Arithi for the plaintiff
P.M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE