[2009] KEHC 540 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 540 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs' pleadings were neither scandalous, frivolous, nor vexatious, nor did they amount to an abuse of the process of the court. The court further held that the pleadings raised important and weighty legal points that warranted determination at trial. The attempt by parties to introduce...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 540 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dr Jaswinder Sian Hulsman; Plaintiff: Dr Michael Schmidt Hulsman; Defendant: My School (Montessori) Limited; Defendant: Bijal R. Shah
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 178 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons Application to Strike Out Pleadings
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs/respondents
Legal Topics
Striking Out Pleadings, Abuse of Process, Scandalous Pleadings, Frivolous and Vexatious Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Striking Out Pleadings Abuse of Process Scandalous Pleadings Frivolous and Vexatious Pleadings

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Jaswinder Sian Hulsman

Plaintiff

Dr Michael Schmidt Hulsman

Plaintiff

My School (Montessori) Limited

Defendant

Bijal R. Shah

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons Application to Strike Out Pleadings

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings filed by the plaintiffs are scandalous, frivolous, or vexatious.
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings constitute an abuse of the process of the court.
  3. 3 Whether evidence was improperly introduced through written submissions contrary to Order VI Rule (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs' pleadings were neither scandalous, frivolous, nor vexatious, nor did they amount to an abuse of the process of the court. The court further held that the pleadings raised important and weighty legal points that warranted determination at trial. The attempt by parties to introduce evidence through written submissions was contrary to the Civil Procedure Rules. Consequently, the application to strike out the pleadings was dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs/respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs/respondents

Orders

  • The defendants/applicants' chamber summons application dated 24th June 2009 is dismissed.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the plaintiffs/respondents.