[2018] KEHC 1756 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had previously indicated readiness to proceed and had been given opportunities to present its evidence. The repeated applications to file additional documents, particularly bank statements, raised concerns about delay and possible abuse of process. However, in the interest of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 1756 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission; Defendant: Jimmy Mutuku Kiamba; Defendant: Tracy Mbinya Musau; Defendant: Jimbise Limited; Defendant: Muthaiga Green Acres Ltd; Respondent: Equity Bank Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Case 1 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Anti Corruption Case / Interlocutory Directions on Plaintiff's Application to File Additional Documents
- Outcome
- Plaintiff granted final leave to serve additional bank statements; hearing adjourned to allow defendants to respond.
- Legal Topics
- Adducing Additional Evidence, Case Management, Adjournment of Hearing
- 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
Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission
Plaintiff
Jimmy Mutuku Kiamba
Defendant
Tracy Mbinya Musau
Defendant
Jimbise Limited
Defendant
Muthaiga Green Acres Ltd
Defendant
Equity Bank Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Anti Corruption Case / Interlocutory Directions on Plaintiff's Application to File Additional Documents
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to file additional bank statements after commencement of hearing.
- 2 Whether the delay and repeated applications by the plaintiff amount to an abuse of court process.
- 3 Whether the defendants are prejudiced by late service of documents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had previously indicated readiness to proceed and had been given opportunities to present its evidence. The repeated applications to file additional documents, particularly bank statements, raised concerns about delay and possible abuse of process. However, in the interest of justice and to ensure all relevant evidence is before the court, the judge reluctantly allowed the plaintiff a final opportunity to serve the defendants with the missing bank statements, with directions that the defendants be given time to respond. The court emphasized that this indulgence would not be granted again and expressed concern over the apparent scheme to delay the...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff granted final leave to serve additional bank statements; hearing adjourned to allow defendants to respond.
Orders
- Plaintiff to serve defendants with the missing bank statements.
- Defendants granted time to respond to the additional documents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
ANTI-CORRUPTION & ECONOMIC CRIMES CASE NO. 1 OF 2016
ETHICS AND ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION.......................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JIMMY MUTUKU KIAMBA.....................................................1ST DEFENDANT
TRACY MBINYA MUSAU........................................................2ND DEFENDANT
JIMBISE LIMITED...................................................................3RD DEFENDANT
MUTHAIGA GREEN ACRES LTD..........................................4TH DEFENDANT
AND
EQUITY BANK LIMITED.................................................INTERESTED PARTY
DIRECTIONS
I have had a chance of perusing the court record, the application made by the plaintiff on 9th October 2018, the Ruling by this court dated 9th October 2018 and the Application made by the plaintiff on 5th November 2018 and find as follows:
1 PW1 gave his evidence in chief on 4th October 2018. Cross examination commenced running through to 5th October 2018 when Mr. Makokha requested for an adjournment to enable him attend to some matters at the EACC.
2 It is on record that the defence would only require 15 minutes and close in on their cross examination of PW1. It was at that point that Mr. Kagucia made an application seeking leave to file a further affidavit to introduce new documents which he said were with PW1 only that they were not bound.
3 A Ruling was made and directions given on 9th October 2018. This matter was fixed for hearing on 5th, 6th and 8th November 2018.
4 Come 5th November 2018 the plaintiff further wants this court to give it another opportunity to file more bank statements claiming that there are gaps in the statements filed.
5 The reasons given for the application are the same as those given on 5th October 2018. The witness in the witness box (PW1) on 4th and 5th October 2018 allegedly had all these bank statements and the court is left wondering where the documents disappeared to.
6 The plaintiff herein has always given the impression that it was ready to proceed with its case. It is therefore a surprise that they are not. It must be remembered that this court has been pushing for this matter to proceed to conclusion because the defendants’ accounts have been frozen for quite sometime now.
7 Why would PW1 have documents one minute and the next minute he does not have them? Could there be some interference by some quarters? What I am witnessing here is a scheme to derail the hearing of this matter which this court will not be party to.
8 Even if the plaintiff was ready with the so called missing documents the defendants would need to be served and respond to them. At the same time the Court would wish to have all relevant documents presented before it to enable it arrive at a just decision.
9 For the last time, I will allow the plaintiff to serve the defendants with the supposed to have been missing bank statements. The defendants will be given time to react to them. This means the case cannot proceed today.
Dated, signed and delivered this 6th day of November 2018 in open court at Nairobi.
HEDWIG I. ONG’UDI
JUDGE