[2020] KEHC 9934 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 9934 (KLR)

The court found that the application to set aside the consent order was res judicata, as a similar application had previously been dismissed by Kasango J. on 13th June 2018. The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any new grounds such as fraud, mistake, or undue influence that would warrant setting aside the consent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 9934 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Joseph Wangombe Thuo; Plaintiff: Jane Wanjiru Wangombe; Defendant: Bank of Africa Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 128 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Consent Order
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the defendant
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Setting Aside Consent Orders, Fraud in Contracts
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Res Judicata Setting Aside Consent Orders Fraud in Contracts

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

Joseph Wangombe Thuo

Plaintiff

Jane Wanjiru Wangombe

Plaintiff

Bank of Africa Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Consent Order

  1. 1 Whether the application to set aside the consent order is res judicata.
  2. 2 Whether grounds for setting aside the consent order such as fraud, mistake, or undue influence have been established.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application to set aside the consent order was res judicata, as a similar application had previously been dismissed by Kasango J. on 13th June 2018. The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any new grounds such as fraud, mistake, or undue influence that would warrant setting aside the consent order. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs to the defendant.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the defendant

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' application dated 25th September 2019 is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the defendant.