[2013] KEHC 4698 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 4698 (KLR)

The court held that the cross-petition, which sought damages and other relief for statements made in the course of the withdrawn petition, could not be sustained. The right of access to court under Articles 22 and 48 of the Constitution protects parties from liability for statements made in the course of legal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 4698 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Society for the Mentally Handicapped; Respondent: Samuel Njuguna Kabue; Respondent: Hellen Mudora Obande; Respondent: Phoebe A Nyagudi; Respondent: John S Halake; Respondent: Patience Chome; Respondent: Phitalis Were Masakhwe; Respondent: Julius Nabende; Respondent: Hon Josephine Sinyo; Respondent: Hon Justin Muturi; Respondent: Muthoni Kihara; Respondent: Joseph M Shiroko; Respondent: Simon J Ndubai; Respondent: Susan Kirima; Respondent: Eunice Kahoi; Respondent: Joseph Wamathaga; Respondent: Catherine Amunga Wameyo; Respondent: Lynnette Muganda; Respondent: Beatrice Odundo; Respondent: Cecilia Mbaka; Respondent: Kizito Omukanga; Respondent: Isaac Simiyu Manyonge; Respondent: Josephine Pakata; Respondent: Jackson Lokwatom; Respondent: John F Olinga; Respondent: Francis Asiema; Respondent: Jayne Asuma; Respondent: Charles O Anyango; Respondent: Rukia Ahmed; Respondent: David Ole Sankok; Respondent: Anastacia Magoma; Respondent: Salome Wanjiku Kimata; Respondent: Tom Gichuhi; Respondent: Paddy Onyango; Respondent: Florence Pakata; Respondent: Geoffrey M Wathigo; Respondent: Josephat O Mukobe; Respondent: Mbarak S Twahir; Respondent: Titus M Kilika; Respondent: Anne Muthoni Kagwi; Respondent: Isaac Muigua Mwaura; Respondent: Godliver Omondi; Respondent: Fatma Wangare Haji; Respondent: Alice Mitine; Respondent: James Kariuki Ndwiga; Respondent: Peter Wango
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 490 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Cross Petition After Withdrawal of Main Petition
Outcome
cross-petition struck out; costs awarded to respondents
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Access to Justice, Striking Out Pleadings, Costs Awards
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Access to Justice Striking Out Pleadings Costs Awards

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Society for the Mentally Handicapped

Applicant

Samuel Njuguna Kabue

Respondent

Hellen Mudora Obande

Respondent

Phoebe A Nyagudi

Respondent

John S Halake

Respondent

Patience Chome

Respondent

Phitalis Were Masakhwe

Respondent

Julius Nabende

Respondent

Hon Josephine Sinyo

Respondent

Hon Justin Muturi

Respondent

Muthoni Kihara

Respondent

Joseph M Shiroko

Respondent

Simon J Ndubai

Respondent

Susan Kirima

Respondent

Eunice Kahoi

Respondent

Joseph Wamathaga

Respondent

Catherine Amunga Wameyo

Respondent

Lynnette Muganda

Respondent

Beatrice Odundo

Respondent

Cecilia Mbaka

Respondent

Kizito Omukanga

Respondent

Isaac Simiyu Manyonge

Respondent

Josephine Pakata

Respondent

Jackson Lokwatom

Respondent

John F Olinga

Respondent

Francis Asiema

Respondent

Jayne Asuma

Respondent

Charles O Anyango

Respondent

Rukia Ahmed

Respondent

David Ole Sankok

Respondent

Anastacia Magoma

Respondent

Salome Wanjiku Kimata

Respondent

Tom Gichuhi

Respondent

Paddy Onyango

Respondent

Florence Pakata

Respondent

Geoffrey M Wathigo

Respondent

Josephat O Mukobe

Respondent

Mbarak S Twahir

Respondent

Titus M Kilika

Respondent

Anne Muthoni Kagwi

Respondent

Isaac Muigua Mwaura

Respondent

Godliver Omondi

Respondent

Fatma Wangare Haji

Respondent

Alice Mitine

Respondent

James Kariuki Ndwiga

Respondent

Peter Wango

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Cross Petition After Withdrawal of Main Petition

  1. 1 Whether the cross-petition should be struck out following the withdrawal of the main petition.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents are entitled to damages or costs for alleged defamatory statements made in the course of the proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether statements made in court proceedings can form the basis for liability outside the law of defamation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the cross-petition, which sought damages and other relief for statements made in the course of the withdrawn petition, could not be sustained. The right of access to court under Articles 22 and 48 of the Constitution protects parties from liability for statements made in the course of legal proceedings. If any defamatory statements were made outside the court or published, the appropriate remedy would be under the law of defamation, not through a cross-petition in the same proceedings. The only relief available to the cross-petitioners in this context was an award of costs, which the court granted. The cross-petition was therefore struck out, and the petitioner was...

Court Disposition

cross-petition struck out; costs awarded to respondents

Orders

  • The cross-petition dated 30th November 2012 is hereby struck out.
  • The petitioner shall bear the costs of the cross-petitioners.