[2013] KEHC 5132 (KLR)
The court found that although there was a prolonged delay in prosecuting the suit, the explanation provided by the plaintiffs—namely, the death of the 1st plaintiff and the time required to obtain letters of administration for substitution—was satisfactory. Guided by the principle in IVITA v KYUMBU, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 5132 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Julia Wanjiru & 8 Others; Defendant: Karatina Municipal Council
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 26 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Application for dismissal for want of prosecution dismissed with conditions.
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Substitution of Parties
- 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
Julia Wanjiru & 8 Others
Plaintiff
Karatina Municipal Council
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to prolonged delay by the plaintiffs.
- 2 Whether the explanation for delay provided by the plaintiffs is sufficient to prevent dismissal of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although there was a prolonged delay in prosecuting the suit, the explanation provided by the plaintiffs—namely, the death of the 1st plaintiff and the time required to obtain letters of administration for substitution—was satisfactory. Guided by the principle in IVITA v KYUMBU, the court exercised its discretion not to dismiss the suit but instead ordered the plaintiffs to fix the main suit for hearing within 30 days, failing which the suit would stand dismissed with costs to the defendant.
Court Disposition
Application for dismissal for want of prosecution dismissed with conditions.
Orders
- Plaintiffs/respondents to fix the main suit for hearing within 30 days from the date of the ruling.
- Failure to comply will result in the suit standing dismissed with costs to the defendant/applicant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nyeri
Civil Case 26 of 2005 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-autospace:ideograph-other; font-size:12. 0pt;"Liberation Serif","serif";} </style> <![endif]
JULIA WANJIRU & 8 OTHERS ..….……..........….............…PLAINTIFFS
Versus
KARATINA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ………….................…DEFENDANT
RULING
1. The application is dated 2nd April 2012 under order 17 rule 2(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules in which the applicant seeks an order that the suit be dismissed with cost for want of prosecution.
2. It is supported by the affidavit of Charles Wahome Gikonyo advocate for the applicant in which he deponed that more than three years have since passed since the case was last set down for hearing and that the respondent /plaintiff has not been keen to prosecute the case.
3. The application is opposed by the Respondent through a replying affidavit by one Lawrence Karumba Irungu sworn on 19th November 2012 in which the said deponed that the 1st respondent died on 3rd October 2009 and that they were advised to take out letters of administration to be in a position to have her substituted.
4. That he got temporary letters of administration on 3rd August, 2011 but were under the impression that matters of substitution would only go on after the final grant which was given on 20th January 2012 but got a signed copy on 16th November 2012.
5. The test applied by the courts in an application for dismissal for want of prosecution is whether the delay is prolonged and in excusable and if it is whether justice can be done despite the delay. Thus even if the delay is prolonged if court is satisfied with the plaintiff's excusefor delay and that justice can still be done to parties, the action will not be dismissed but it will be ordered that it be set down for hearing at the earliest available time. It is a matter in the discretion of court Hon. Justice Chesoni in IVITA V KYUMBU(1984)KLR 440.
6. I have looked at the affidavit by the respondent and guided by the above authority I am satisfied with the explanation given for the delay by the respondent.
7. I therefore order that the plaintiffs/respondent fix the main suit down for hearing within the next 30 days from the date herein failure to which the suit shall stand dismissed with costs to the defendant/ applicant.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 7th day of February 2013.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
Ruling read in court in the presence of Mr. Wachira for Wahome in the absence of Mr. Ndirangu.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE