[2006] KEHC 2545 (KLR)

[2006] KEHC 2545 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff's application was dismissed in error at the stage of certification for urgency, which was not the appropriate time to determine the merits of the application. The justice of the case required that the plaintiff be given an opportunity to prosecute its application inter partes....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] KEHC 2545 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kenya National Capital Corporation; Defendant: Kibogoye General Stores Ltd & Two Others
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 22 of 1992
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review and Setting Aside of Dismissal Order
Outcome
application allowed; dismissal order set aside; application reinstated
Judges
DW Mbuteti
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Non Attendance, Setting Aside Orders, Review of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Non Attendance Setting Aside Orders Review of Court Orders

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

Kenya National Capital Corporation

Plaintiff

Kibogoye General Stores Ltd & Two Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Review and Setting Aside of Dismissal Order

  1. 1 Whether the order dismissing the plaintiff's application for non-attendance at the certification stage was proper.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to have the dismissal order set aside and the application reinstated.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's application was dismissed in error at the stage of certification for urgency, which was not the appropriate time to determine the merits of the application. The justice of the case required that the plaintiff be given an opportunity to prosecute its application inter partes. Accordingly, the court allowed the application for review, set aside the dismissal order of 24th November 2004, and reinstated the plaintiff's chamber summons dated 23rd November 2004 for hearing.

Court Disposition

application allowed; dismissal order set aside; application reinstated

Orders

  • The order of 24th November 2004 dismissing the plaintiff's application is set aside.
  • The plaintiff's chamber summons dated 23rd November 2004 is reinstated for hearing.