[2023] KEHC 23593 (KLR)
The court found that the issues in the present suit are substantially the same as those in JR Cause No 2 of 2017, which is still pending. The doctrine of sub-judice precludes the court from proceeding with this matter while the other suit is unresolved. The previous stay order issued on May 8, 2018, remains in force...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 23593 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: James Gacheru Kariuki; Plaintiff: Harrison Kariira Thuku; Plaintiff: George Kingiri Wanjohi; Plaintiff: David Ngugi Kabati; Plaintiff: Company Limited; Plaintiff: Ruth Mbecha; Plaintiff: Naomi Wanjiru Kiburu; Defendant: The County Government Of Kiambu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 16 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Directions
- Outcome
- Suit to remain stayed; to be mentioned alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
- Judges
- DO Chepkwony
- Legal Topics
- Sub Judice, Stay of Proceedings, Case Management
- 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
James Gacheru Kariuki
Plaintiff
Harrison Kariira Thuku
Plaintiff
George Kingiri Wanjohi
Plaintiff
David Ngugi Kabati
Plaintiff
Company Limited
Plaintiff
Ruth Mbecha
Plaintiff
Naomi Wanjiru Kiburu
Plaintiff
The County Government Of Kiambu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the current suit should proceed independently or remain stayed pending the determination of JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
- 2 Whether the doctrine of sub-judice applies to bar the continuation of this suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the issues in the present suit are substantially the same as those in JR Cause No 2 of 2017, which is still pending. The doctrine of sub-judice precludes the court from proceeding with this matter while the other suit is unresolved. The previous stay order issued on May 8, 2018, remains in force as it has not been altered or discharged. The separation of files does not affect the applicability of the sub-judice doctrine or the validity of the stay order. Therefore, the court directed that this suit be mentioned alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017 to confirm compliance with the existing orders.
Court Disposition
Suit to remain stayed; to be mentioned alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
Orders
- The orders issued on May 8, 2018, staying proceedings in this suit, remain in force.
- This suit shall be mentioned alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
Kariuki & 6 others v County Government of Kiambu (Civil Case 16 of 2016) [2023] KEHC 23593 (KLR) (21 September 2023) (Directions)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 23593 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kiambu
Civil Case 16 of 2016
DO Chepkwony, J
September 21, 2023
Between
James Gacheru Kariuki
1st Plaintiff
Harrison Kariira Thuku
2nd Plaintiff
George Kingiri Wanjohi
3rd Plaintiff
David Ngugi Kabati
4th Plaintiff
Company Limited
5th Plaintiff
Ruth Mbecha
6th Plaintiff
Naomi Wanjiru Kiburu
7th Plaintiff
and
The County Government Of Kiambu
Defendant
Directions
1. This matter came up for mention on July 25, 2023 for parties to take directions. Upon listening to counsel for the Applicant, it came out that directions were required to issue on whether the suit should proceed alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
2. According to the 1st Plaintiff, although there were prior directions that the JR Cause No 2 of 2017 was the file to proceed, the two files have now been separated hence this Court is implored to allow parties proceed with this matter.
3. I have perused the court record and a consideration thereof find that the same speaks for itself. The record indicated that the instant suit was stayed way back on May 8, 2018 to await the determination of JR Cause No 2 of 2017. The major reason for this being that the issues raised in this suit were substantially in issue for determination in JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
4. In this Court’s view, it is a widely accepted concept that a court should not proceed with a suit in which the issues raised therein are directly and substantively the same as those in a previously instituted suit as between the same parties and is pending before the same or another court with jurisdiction to determine it. In other words, the court is precluded under the doctrine of sub-judice from trying a matter that is in one way or another before another court of competent jurisdiction.
5. It is this principle of sub-judice that informed this court to issue stay of proceedings order in this matter on May 8, 2018. So far, those orders have not been altered, fulfilled or otherwise discharged. They therefore cannot be overlooked simply on the ground that this file has been separated from JR Cause No 2 of 2017. The best way forward is for the parties herein to attend the court handling JR Cause No 2 of 2017 and abide or comply with the orders or directions issued therein on May 8, 2018, unless otherwise ordered and or directed.
6. In the upshot, the court reiterates that the orders issued on May 8, 2018 and directs that this instant suit be mentioned alongside JR Cause No 2 of 2017.
7. Mention on October 23, 2023 before the Deputy Registrar to confirm compliance.
It is so ordered.
DIRECTIONS DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 21stDAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023. D.O CHEPKWONYJUDGE