[2022] KEELC 14954 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 14954 (KLR)

The court found that the suit against the 1st and 4th Defendants was a nullity because they were already deceased at the time the suit was filed, and their estates should have been sued instead. The court further held that the suit against the 2nd and 5th Defendants had abated due to failure to substitute them...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 14954 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Nyangosi Mogoi; Plaintiff: Nyariki Moseti; Plaintiff: Charles Momanyi; Defendant: Tertio Nyang’au; Defendant: Nathan Marimbia; Defendant: Jeremiah Mwambi; Defendant: Francis Amenya; Defendant: Elizabeth Onyinkwa; Appellant: Richard Nyabuti Nyang’au
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nyamira
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 33 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit Against Deceased Defendants and Abatement of Suit
Outcome
Suit against 1st and 4th Defendants struck out as a nullity; suit against 2nd and 5th Defendants abated; suit against 3rd Defendant stands; costs to estates and Interested Party.
Judges
JM Kamau
Legal Topics
Abatement of Suit, Striking Out Proceedings, Substitution of Parties, Capacity to Sue, Constructive Tenancy
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Abatement of Suit Striking Out Proceedings Substitution of Parties Capacity to Sue Constructive Tenancy

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nyangosi Mogoi

Plaintiff

Nyariki Moseti

Plaintiff

Charles Momanyi

Plaintiff

Tertio Nyang’au

Defendant

Nathan Marimbia

Defendant

Jeremiah Mwambi

Defendant

Francis Amenya

Defendant

Elizabeth Onyinkwa

Defendant

Richard Nyabuti Nyang’au

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit Against Deceased Defendants and Abatement of Suit

  1. 1 Whether the suit against the 1st and 4th Defendants, who were deceased at the time of filing, is a nullity.
  2. 2 Whether the suit against the 2nd and 5th Defendants has abated due to failure to substitute within the prescribed time.
  3. 3 Whether the Interested Party had capacity to bring the application for striking out and abatement.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the suit against the 1st and 4th Defendants was a nullity because they were already deceased at the time the suit was filed, and their estates should have been sued instead. The court further held that the suit against the 2nd and 5th Defendants had abated due to failure to substitute them within the statutory period after their deaths. The Interested Party, having been granted letters of administration ad litem and joined by consent, had capacity to bring the application. The suit against the 3rd Defendant was not abated as there was still time for substitution. The court accordingly struck out the suit against the 1st and 4th Defendants, declared abatement against...

Court Disposition

Suit against 1st and 4th Defendants struck out as a nullity; suit against 2nd and 5th Defendants abated; suit against 3rd Defendant stands; costs to estates and Interested Party.

Orders

  • Suit against 1st and 4th Defendants struck out with costs to their estates.
  • Suit against 2nd and 5th Defendants declared abated as of April 17, 2017 and July 20, 2018 respectively.