[2016] KEHC 6231 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 6231 (KLR)

The court found itself unable to determine whether the defence is frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, or an abuse of the court process because the defence document was missing from the court file. The absence of the defence could have resulted from administrative mishandling during the transfer of the file or within...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 6231 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Leonard Njiru Njogu; Defendant: Obed Gachoki Difatha; Defendant: Simon Mwaniki Gachoki
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kerugoya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 201 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / Interlocutory Application; Awaiting Defence for Determination of Application to Strike Out Defence
Outcome
Application for striking out defence deferred; further mention scheduled pending availing of defence document.
Judges
BN Olao
Legal Topics
Striking Out Defence, Frivolous Pleadings, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
en
Land and Property Striking Out Defence Frivolous Pleadings Abuse of Court Process

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leonard Njiru Njogu

Plaintiff

Obed Gachoki Difatha

Defendant

Simon Mwaniki Gachoki

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Environment Case / Interlocutory Application; Awaiting Defence for Determination of Application to Strike Out Defence

  1. 1 Whether the defence filed by the defendants is frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, or an abuse of the court process.
  2. 2 Whether the court can determine the application to strike out the defence in the absence of the defence document.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found itself unable to determine whether the defence is frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, or an abuse of the court process because the defence document was missing from the court file. The absence of the defence could have resulted from administrative mishandling during the transfer of the file or within the registry. Without the defence, the court cannot make a substantive determination on the application to strike it out. The court therefore directed that the Deputy Registrar write to the defendants/respondents to provide a copy of the defence, and also allowed the plaintiff/applicant's counsel to avail a copy if possible. The matter was set for mention to fix a ruling date...

Court Disposition

Application for striking out defence deferred; further mention scheduled pending availing of defence document.

Orders

  • Deputy Registrar to write to defendants/respondents to avail a copy of the defence.
  • Counsel for the plaintiff/applicant may also provide a copy of the defence to the court.