[2009] KEHC 3020 (KLR)
The court found that there was a clear arithmetical error in the judgment delivered on 27/3/2009, as the record showed the correct sum should be Kshs.6,510,000 and not Kshs.6,590,000. The court exercised its power under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to correct this mistake. On the issue of costs, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 3020 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Joel Kamau Kibe; Defendant: The Kenya Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 602 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Correct Arithmetical Error and for Costs
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Judgment sum corrected. Costs apportioned.
- Legal Topics
- Correction of Judgment, Costs Award, Arithmetical Mistake, Withdrawal of Claim
- 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
Joel Kamau Kibe
Plaintiff
The Kenya Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Correct Arithmetical Error and for Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judgment sum should be corrected from Kshs.6,590,000 to Kshs.6,510,000 due to an arithmetical error.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit after withdrawal of the special damages claim.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was a clear arithmetical error in the judgment delivered on 27/3/2009, as the record showed the correct sum should be Kshs.6,510,000 and not Kshs.6,590,000. The court exercised its power under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to correct this mistake. On the issue of costs, the court held that since the plaintiff was the successful party, he was entitled to costs of the suit, except for the portion relating to the withdrawn special damages claim. Accordingly, the plaintiff was awarded 90% of the costs, while the defendant was awarded 10% of the costs corresponding to the withdrawn claim. The court thus corrected the judgment sum and apportioned costs as per...
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Judgment sum corrected. Costs apportioned.
Orders
- Judgment sum corrected to Kshs.6,510,000.
- Plaintiff awarded 90% of the costs of the suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS
Civil Case 602 of 2007
JOEL KAMAU KIBE ………………………………………..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
THE KENYA ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD. ……DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
Application dated 17/4/09 Notice of Motion seeks to correct an arithmetical mistake appearing in the ruling given on 27/3/2009 by this court. According to the record the judgment was entered for plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of Kshs.6,510,000/= and not Kshs.6,590,000/=.
The prayer 3 of the notice of motion seeks order for costs. The suit has been finalized. However, the costs of the suit was not granted to the successful party. Only costs of application was awarded. The plaintiff had indicated he would proceed with prayer (c) and (e) of the Plaint namely, special damages and costs.
The plaintiff proceeded to withdraw prayer (c) on special damages and therefore only prayers for costs is outstanding. Normally as stated in the Civil Procedure Act costs follow the event the winner is awarded the costs. Since the suit has now come to a conclusion, I find that the plaintiff is entitled to 90% of the costs which the defendant is entitled to 10% being the costs of withdrawn prayer.
It is so ordered. Judgment is correct to read “Kshs.6,510,000/=”.
DATED and DELIVERED at Nairobi this 18th day of 2009.
JOYCE N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE