[2010] KEHC 3522 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant failed to provide any proper or credible reason for the delay of about one year and nine months in prosecuting the contempt application. Given the urgent nature of contempt proceedings and the need for their expeditious disposal, it was unjust to allow the application to remain...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 3522 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Harrison Maingi; Respondent: S.T. Mugacha (T/a Galaxy Auctioneers); Respondent: B. N. Kamau, Advocate; Respondent: Daniel Nzioka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 1059 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Application to dismiss for want of prosecution allowed; contempt application dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, 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
Harrison Maingi
Applicant
S.T. Mugacha (T/a Galaxy Auctioneers)
Respondent
B. N. Kamau, Advocate
Respondent
Daniel Nzioka
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the contempt of court application should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inordinate delay.
- 2 Whether the applicant provided a credible reason for the delay in prosecuting the contempt application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to provide any proper or credible reason for the delay of about one year and nine months in prosecuting the contempt application. Given the urgent nature of contempt proceedings and the need for their expeditious disposal, it was unjust to allow the application to remain unresolved over the respondents. The court exercised its discretion to allow the respondents' application and dismissed the contempt application for want of prosecution, with costs to the respondents.
Court Disposition
Application to dismiss for want of prosecution allowed; contempt application dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application by notice of motion dated 13th August, 2009 is allowed with costs.
- The contempt application by notice of motion dated 22nd June, 2005 is dismissed with costs for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Miscellaneous 1059 of 2004
HARRISON MAINGI ............................................................................APPLICANT
V E R S U S
1. S.T. MUGACHA (T/a Galaxy Auctioneers)
2. B. N. KAMAU, ADVOCATE
3. DANIEL NZIOKA ...................................................................RESPONDENTS
R U L I N G
Contempt of court proceedings, by their very nature, are urgent. Once instituted, they ought to be prosecuted expeditiously and without undue delay. Such proceedings are intended to enforce the authority and dignity of the court, hence the need for them to be disposed of with dispatch.
An application to commit the Respondents to jail for contempt of court was filed herein by notice of motion dated 22nd June, 2005. The said application was last before a judge on 26th November, 2007 when it was adjourned upon application by the Applicant. The Respondents then brought the present application by notice of motion dated 13th August, 2009for dismissal of the said contempt application for want of prosecution.
I have read the supporting and opposing affidavits. I have also given due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsels appearing. No proper or credible reason for the delay in prosecuting the contempt application has been given. The said delay is about one year and nine months. It is unjust that the said application should remain hanging over the heads of the Respondents all this time.
I will in the event allow with costs the application by notice of motion dated 13th August, 2009. The contempt application by notice of motion dated 22nd June, 2005 is hereby dismissed with costs for want of prosecution. There will be an order accordingly.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010
H. P. G. WAWERU
J U D G E
DELIVERED THIS 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010