[2005] KEHC 2244 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 2244 (KLR)

The court found that there was no affidavit of service showing that the respondent's application to dismiss the main application was served upon the applicant or his advocates. Only a hearing notice was served, which is insufficient. As a result, it was improper for the court to have allowed the application to be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KEHC 2244 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: George S. Ngombo; Respondent: The Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society of Kenya
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 46 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Service of Application
Outcome
Application to dismiss the main application set aside; respondent ordered to serve application afresh.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Service of Process, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Judicial Review Service of Process Procedural Fairness

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George S. Ngombo

Applicant

The Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society of Kenya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Service of Application

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's application to dismiss the main application was properly served upon the applicant or his advocates.
  2. 2 Whether it was proper for the court to have heard the respondent's application ex-parte in the absence of evidence of service.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no affidavit of service showing that the respondent's application to dismiss the main application was served upon the applicant or his advocates. Only a hearing notice was served, which is insufficient. As a result, it was improper for the court to have allowed the application to be argued ex-parte. The court therefore ordered that the respondent must serve its application dated 9th April 2003 upon the applicant's advocates and thereafter list it for hearing afresh, ensuring compliance with the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness.

Court Disposition

Application to dismiss the main application set aside; respondent ordered to serve application afresh.

Orders

  • The respondent shall serve its application dated 9th April 2003 upon the applicant's advocates.
  • The application shall thereafter be listed for hearing afresh.