[2009] KEHC 3115 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 3115 (KLR)

The court found that the application to set aside the orders of 7th December, 2007 was incompetent and misconceived, as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the court lacked jurisdiction or that there was any proper basis for setting aside the orders. The court also held that no sufficient cause was disclosed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 3115 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Applicant (Name Not Provided); Respondent: Respondent (Name Not Provided)
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Succession Cause 70 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Grant and for Court Disqualification
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
CN Mugo
Legal Topics
Revocation of Grant, Jurisdiction of Court, Disqualification of Judge
Source Language
en
Family and Children Revocation of Grant Jurisdiction of Court Disqualification of Judge

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant (Name Not Provided)

Applicant

Respondent (Name Not Provided)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Grant and for Court Disqualification

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside the orders issued by Hon. Mr. Justice Kimaru on 7th December, 2007 for lack of jurisdiction.
  2. 2 Whether the application for disqualification of the presiding judge is competent and properly before the court.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's conduct amounts to abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application to set aside the orders of 7th December, 2007 was incompetent and misconceived, as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the court lacked jurisdiction or that there was any proper basis for setting aside the orders. The court also held that no sufficient cause was disclosed for the disqualification of the presiding judge. The applicant's conduct, including repeated changes of counsel and failure to prosecute the application with diligence, was deemed an abuse of the court process. Consequently, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to strike out and dismiss the application suo moto.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 26th June 2008 is hereby struck out and accordingly dismissed.