[2011] KEHC 1814 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 1814 (KLR)

The court held that the applicant erred in instituting the proceedings by way of Notice of Motion, which is not a manner prescribed for the commencement of suits under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules. The court emphasized that pleadings, as defined by section 2 of the Act, do not include a Notice of Motion for the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 1814 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Michael Kungu Kigia; Respondent: Meru Teachers House Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 13 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Merits of Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Legal Topics
Commencement of Suits, Notice of Motion, Pleadings, Jurisdiction of Tribunals
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commencement of Suits Notice of Motion Pleadings Jurisdiction of Tribunals

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Kungu Kigia

Applicant

Meru Teachers House Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Merits of Application

  1. 1 Whether a civil suit can be properly initiated by way of Notice of Motion under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's prayers fall within the jurisdiction of the High Court or should have been pursued as an appeal or judicial review from the Business Premises Rent Tribunal.
  3. 3 Whether the application as filed is ambiguous, confusing, and lacking in merit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant erred in instituting the proceedings by way of Notice of Motion, which is not a manner prescribed for the commencement of suits under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules. The court emphasized that pleadings, as defined by section 2 of the Act, do not include a Notice of Motion for the initiation of a suit. The applicant's prayers did not amount to an appeal or judicial review from the Business Premises Rent Tribunal, which would have been the proper procedural route. Furthermore, the application and supporting affidavit were found to be ambiguous, confusing, and lacking in merit. Consequently, the application was dismissed for being unprocedural and without...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 24th February 2011 is dismissed.
  • Costs are awarded to the respondent.