[2009] KEHC 1669 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1669 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff's suit raises weighty issues that cannot be conclusively determined at the interlocutory stage. The application to strike out the suit against the 3rd defendant was therefore premature. The court held that such issues should be canvassed and determined at a full hearing, where all...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 1669 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kaniki Karisa Kaniki; Defendant: Commercial Bank of Africa; Defendant: Giro Commercial Bank Ltd; Defendant: Miathene-Malindi Enterprises Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Commercial Civil Suit 177 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Chamber Summons Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Suit Against 3rd Defendant
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JV Juma
Legal Topics
Striking Out Pleadings, Reasonable Cause of Action, Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Striking Out Pleadings Reasonable Cause of Action Interlocutory Applications

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kaniki Karisa Kaniki

Plaintiff

Commercial Bank of Africa

Defendant

Giro Commercial Bank Ltd

Defendant

Miathene-Malindi Enterprises Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chamber Summons Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Suit Against 3rd Defendant

  1. 1 Whether the suit against the 3rd defendant discloses a reasonable cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the suit against the 3rd defendant should be struck out at the interlocutory stage.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's suit raises weighty issues that cannot be conclusively determined at the interlocutory stage. The application to strike out the suit against the 3rd defendant was therefore premature. The court held that such issues should be canvassed and determined at a full hearing, where all parties will have the opportunity to present their evidence and arguments. As a result, the application was dismissed in its entirety, and the court declined to grant the orders sought by the 3rd defendant.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to strike out the suit against the 3rd defendant is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Costs in the cause.