[2004] KEHC 1567 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff's advocate had provided a credible explanation for his non-attendance, namely confusion arising from the listing of the case and the allocation to a judge not dealing with running down matters. The court exercised its discretion to reinstate the suit, holding that the confusion...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 1567 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Lydia Wanjiru Munyoro; Defendant: Alex Ndungutse
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 2832 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Application for Reinstatement of Suit After Dismissal for Non Attendance
- Outcome
- Application allowed; suit reinstated.
- Legal Topics
- Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Lydia Wanjiru Munyoro
Plaintiff
Alex Ndungutse
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Application for Reinstatement of Suit After Dismissal for Non Attendance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be reinstated after dismissal for non-attendance due to confusion in court listing.
- 2 Whether the advocate's explanation for non-attendance constitutes sufficient cause for reinstatement.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff's advocate had provided a credible explanation for his non-attendance, namely confusion arising from the listing of the case and the allocation to a judge not dealing with running down matters. The court exercised its discretion to reinstate the suit, holding that the confusion constituted sufficient cause and that the interests of justice required the matter to be heard on its merits. The court emphasized the importance of open court hearings and proper cause listing to avoid such procedural mishaps.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; suit reinstated.
Orders
- The suit is reinstated.
- Costs will be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH CORUT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 2832 OF 1996
LYDIA WANJIRU MUNYORO …………………………. PLAITNIFF
VERSUS
ALEX NDUNGUTSE ………………………………. DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
The advocate for the plaintiff explained to this court in his submission and application that prayed for the reinstatement of this suit, that the said suit was not originally on the running down call over. That indeed the suit was listed in the main call over and confirmed in his absence.
That thereafter the case was listed before another judge not dealing with running down matters. He then attended to the chambers only to find that the said case was listed before those chambers and this court.
He was unable to address the court as he was not robbed.
The suit was duly dismissed for non-attendance. He had left his clients else where and they were not in court.
He prays the suit be reinstated and an early date be taken From the explanation given by the advocate on the events of the day it seems clearly that there was some confusion as to the listing on the cause list. He attended to a hearing that indicated the hearing would be done in chambers by a judge who did not deal with running down matters.
It is trite that where the hearing is of a case or a notice of motion it ought to be conducted in open court unless otherwise directed.
The advocate was not able to know which court to attend to. During this process this suit was dismissed.
I hereby use my discretion in the light of this confusion that the said advocate encountered. I hereby allow the application to reinstate this suit in the interest of justice.
Obiter dictum
I wish to just state that where an advocate goes to open court and a judge is duly robbed, the said advocate is not permitted to address the court unless he is robbed. Cases involving a full hearing and the hearing of notice of motions in civil matters are held in open court.
This practice was once lost in our courts but with the new reforms and changes, it is hopped that the dignity of the court will return in hearing matters in open court.
The costs will be in the cause.
Dated this 23rd day of April, 2004 at Nairobi.
M.A ANG’AWA
JUDGE
Mathenge & Muchemi Co. Advocates for the plaitnfif
Mungai & Gakuru advocates for the defendant