[2005] KEHC 1810 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 1810 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide satisfactory and substantiated reasons for his advocate's absence on the date the application was dismissed. No medical evidence was provided to support the claim of illness, no affidavit from the clerk was filed, and the name of the advocate who allegedly held...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KEHC 1810 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jadiel Muthike Njiru; Respondent: Njagi Kithinji
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 180 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Non Attendance
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Application, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Affidavit Evidence, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Reinstatement of Application Dismissal for Non Attendance Affidavit Evidence Costs Award

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jadiel Muthike Njiru

Applicant

Njagi Kithinji

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement After Dismissal for Non Attendance

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient and satisfactory reasons for non-attendance leading to the dismissal of the application.
  2. 2 Whether the application for reinstatement of the dismissed application should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide satisfactory and substantiated reasons for his advocate's absence on the date the application was dismissed. No medical evidence was provided to support the claim of illness, no affidavit from the clerk was filed, and the name of the advocate who allegedly held brief was not disclosed. The court held that the reasons given were not credible or sufficient to warrant the exercise of discretion in favour of reinstatement. Consequently, the application to reinstate the dismissed application was found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to reinstate the application dated 1st November 2002 is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.