[2009] KEHC 1519 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1519 (KLR)

The court held that the provisions of Order VI Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Rule 21(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Rules pertain strictly to pleadings and not to affidavits, which are considered evidence. The applicant's attempt to obtain particulars of affidavits through these provisions was therefore misconceived. The proper avenue for obtaining information contained in affidavits is through the discovery process as set out in Rule 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Rules. The court found that the application, as framed, was an abuse of the court process and dismissed it, directing the applicant to bear the costs.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 1519 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: F Daughter of S; Respondent: H.T.
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
17 June 2009
Case Number
Divorce Cause 13 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Divorce Cause / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Particulars
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
DO Ohungo
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Proceedings, Requests for Particulars, Affidavit Evidence, Discovery of Documents
Source Language
English
Family and Children Civil Procedure Matrimonial Proceedings Requests for Particulars Affidavit Evidence Discovery of Documents

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F Daughter of S

Applicant

H.T.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Cause / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Particulars

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to request for particulars in relation to affidavits under Order VI Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the Matrimonial Causes Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the failure by the respondent to provide particulars justifies preclusion from giving evidence in support of the answer and affidavits.
  3. 3 Whether the application as framed constitutes an abuse of the court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the provisions of Order VI Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Rule 21(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Rules pertain strictly to pleadings and not to affidavits, which are considered evidence. The applicant's attempt to obtain particulars of affidavits through these provisions was therefore misconceived. The proper avenue for obtaining information contained in affidavits is through the discovery process as set out in Rule 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Rules. The court found that the application, as framed, was an abuse of the court process and dismissed it, directing the applicant to bear the costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Chamber Summons application dated 4-5-09 is dismissed.
  • The applicant shall bear the costs of the application.