[2024] KEELC 13359 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 13359 (KLR)

The court held that the application to strike out the suit was not merited because the trial was already underway, with the re-examination of PW1 ongoing. The court emphasized that issues relating to the merits or demerits of the case, including questions of ownership and proprietary rights, should be determined at...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 13359 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: James Ng’ang’a Kung’u; Plaintiff: Myra Wanjiru Kung’u Sadiq alias Monica Wanjiru Kung’u; Defendant: Kibagare Slums Association (Sued Through Abdi Godana Dida & David M. Nyaga, its Officials and Trustees); Respondent: National Land Commission
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 64 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit
Outcome
Application to strike out the suit dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Striking Out Suit, Proprietary Rights, Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Striking Out Suit Proprietary Rights 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Ng’ang’a Kung’u

Plaintiff

Myra Wanjiru Kung’u Sadiq alias Monica Wanjiru Kung’u

Plaintiff

Kibagare Slums Association (Sued Through Abdi Godana Dida & David M. Nyaga, its Officials and Trustees)

Defendant

National Land Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have locus standi to maintain the suit over the suit land.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's application to strike out the suit is merited at the interlocutory stage.
  3. 3 Whether issues of ownership and proprietary rights should be determined at the main hearing or at the interlocutory stage.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application to strike out the suit was not merited because the trial was already underway, with the re-examination of PW1 ongoing. The court emphasized that issues relating to the merits or demerits of the case, including questions of ownership and proprietary rights, should be determined at the main hearing and not at the interlocutory stage. The court relied on constitutional principles of justice and the right to be heard, as well as relevant case law, to conclude that striking out the suit at this stage would be premature and contrary to the interests of substantive justice.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out the suit dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs.

Orders

  • The defendant's Notice of Motion application dated 29.4.2024 is dismissed.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the plaintiffs.