[2017] KEHC 9438 (KLR)
The court determined that the application dated 20th July, 2016 had already been dismissed for want of prosecution on 30th November, 2016. Although there is a subsequent application dated 23rd January 2017 seeking to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the dismissed application, that application has not yet been...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9438 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: KTK Advocates; Respondent: Nyambene Coffee Estates Ltd; Respondent: Nyambene Mills Ltd; Respondent: Lawrence C. Njeru
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Cause 298 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sequence of Applications and Reinstatement
- Outcome
- Application stood over; reinstatement application to be heard first.
- Judges
- F Tuiyott
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Application, Procedural Prioritization
- 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
KTK Advocates
Applicant
Nyambene Coffee Estates Ltd
Respondent
Nyambene Mills Ltd
Respondent
Lawrence C. Njeru
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sequence of Applications and Reinstatement
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the dismissed application should be heard before any further proceedings.
- 2 Whether it was proper to proceed with the prosecution of an application that had already been dismissed for want of prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that the application dated 20th July, 2016 had already been dismissed for want of prosecution on 30th November, 2016. Although there is a subsequent application dated 23rd January 2017 seeking to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the dismissed application, that application has not yet been prosecuted. Therefore, the court held that the application for reinstatement must be heard and determined first before any further proceedings can be entertained on the dismissed application. Proceeding on a dismissed application without reinstatement is procedurally improper.
Court Disposition
Application stood over; reinstatement application to be heard first.
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 23rd January 2017 to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the dismissed application must be heard before any further proceedings.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI HIGH COURT
MISC. CAUSE NO. 298 OF 2015
KTK ADVOCATES……………………..……....……ADVOCATE/APPLICANT
VERSUS
NYAMBENE COFFEE ESTATES LTD………...…1ST CLIENT/RESPONDENT
NYAMBENE MILLS LTD…...………………....…2ND CLIENT/RESPONDENT
LAWRENCE C.NJERU…………………………..3RDCLIENT/RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Counsel Kipkorir appeared before me on 8th June, 2017 in the absence of Counsel for the Clients. I allowed the matter to proceed as the hearing date had been taken by consent on 26th April, 2017.
2. It now turns out however that Counsel Kipkorir prosecuted the Application dated 20th July, 2016 which had been dismissed for want of prosecution on 30the November, 2016. Although there is an application dated 23rd January 2017 to set aside the dismissal Order and to reinstate the dismissed Application, the latter Motion has not been prosecuted.
3. I am afraid the Notice of Motion dated 23rd January 2017 needs to be heard first.
Dated, Signed and Delivered in Court at Nairobi this 22ND day of September,2017.
F. TUIYOTT
JUDGE
PRESENT;
Omollo for Applicant
Malowa for Respondent
Alex - Court Clerk