[2008] KEHC 1793 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 1793 (KLR)

The court found that the issues in this suit, HCCC No. 2 of 2008, and CMCC No. 9954 of 2007 are so intertwined that all parties with a stake in the union leadership dispute must be heard for a just determination. The applicants demonstrated sufficient interest as ousted officials or members, and their exclusion would be prejudicial. The court held that there is no legal bar to joining the applicants at this stage, as Order 1 Rule 10(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules permits such joinder where necessary for the real matter in dispute. The court also found that the manner in which the consent order was obtained raised issues of possible mischief and lack of proper representation, justifying...

Citation
[2008] KEHC 1793 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Jack Apollo; Plaintiff: John Rono; Plaintiff: Albert Lole; Applicant: Caleb Oduor Olum; Applicant: Martha Mkabali; Applicant: Joanes Owino Okotch; Applicant: Samuel Musee Munguti; Applicant: Patrick Shikuku Karangani; Applicant: Elijah Musembei; Applicant: Simon Isiluti; Applicant: William Opondo; Applicant: Alfred Nyongesa; Applicant: Patrick Karanja; Applicant: Benson Kiunga; Applicant: Fred M. Ondari; Applicant: Josephat A. Lwenya; Applicant: Lewis Mugira Kiunga; Applicant: Fredrick Muiruri; Applicant: John Mbugua; Applicant: Thomas Mwambire; Applicant: Simon Kinyanjui; Applicant: Wycliffe Sava; Applicant: Jeremiah Ouma; Defendant: Jared Akama Onyari
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
18 July 2008
Case Number
Civil Case 1723 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Joinder of Parties
Outcome
Application allowed. Applicants enjoined as parties. Each party to bear its own costs.
Judges
AT Sitati
Legal Topics
Trade Union Leadership Disputes, Joinder of Parties, Consent Orders, Fraudulent Consent, Sub Judice Rule
Source Language
English
Employment and Labour Civil Procedure Trade Union Leadership Disputes Joinder of Parties Consent Orders Fraudulent Consent Sub Judice Rule

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jack Apollo

Plaintiff

John Rono

Plaintiff

Albert Lole

Plaintiff

Caleb Oduor Olum

Applicant

Martha Mkabali

Applicant

Joanes Owino Okotch

Applicant

Samuel Musee Munguti

Applicant

Patrick Shikuku Karangani

Applicant

Elijah Musembei

Applicant

Simon Isiluti

Applicant

William Opondo

Applicant

Alfred Nyongesa

Applicant

Patrick Karanja

Applicant

Benson Kiunga

Applicant

Fred M. Ondari

Applicant

Josephat A. Lwenya

Applicant

Lewis Mugira Kiunga

Applicant

Fredrick Muiruri

Applicant

John Mbugua

Applicant

Thomas Mwambire

Applicant

Simon Kinyanjui

Applicant

Wycliffe Sava

Applicant

Jeremiah Ouma

Applicant

Jared Akama Onyari

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Joinder of Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the intended plaintiffs/applicants should be enjoined as parties to the suit to challenge the consent order of October 5, 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the consent order was obtained fraudulently and without proper disclosure to the court.
  3. 3 Whether there is a live suit to which the applicants can be joined, or whether the matter is res judicata or sub judice.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the issues in this suit, HCCC No. 2 of 2008, and CMCC No. 9954 of 2007 are so intertwined that all parties with a stake in the union leadership dispute must be heard for a just determination. The applicants demonstrated sufficient interest as ousted officials or members, and their exclusion would be prejudicial. The court held that there is no legal bar to joining the applicants at this stage, as Order 1 Rule 10(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules permits such joinder where necessary for the real matter in dispute. The court also found that the manner in which the consent order was obtained raised issues of possible mischief and lack of proper representation, justifying...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Applicants enjoined as parties. Each party to bear its own costs.

Orders

  • The applicants are hereby enjoined as parties to the suit in terms of prayer number 2 of the application dated November 20, 2007.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.