[2011] KEHC 3880 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 3880 (KLR)

The court found that the second defence filed by the previous firm of advocates after a notice of change of advocates had been filed was superfluous and constituted an abuse of the court process. The court held that only the first defence, filed by the firm properly on record, should remain. The second defence was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 3880 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Marnier Pierre Andre Roger; Defendant: Alex Muthami Ndungi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 302 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence
Outcome
Second defence struck out as abuse of process; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Change of Advocates, Striking Out Pleadings, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Change of Advocates Striking Out Pleadings Abuse of 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marnier Pierre Andre Roger

Plaintiff

Alex Muthami Ndungi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence

  1. 1 Whether the second defence filed by the previous firm of advocates after a notice of change had been filed is valid.
  2. 2 Whether the second defence constitutes an abuse of the court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second defence filed by the previous firm of advocates after a notice of change of advocates had been filed was superfluous and constituted an abuse of the court process. The court held that only the first defence, filed by the firm properly on record, should remain. The second defence was struck out as it was filed without authority. The defendant was ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Court Disposition

Second defence struck out as abuse of process; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The second defence filed by the previous firm of advocates is struck out.
  • The first defence remains properly on record.