[2020] KEHC 8015 (KLR)
The court found that both the appeal and the lower court matter were duplicates of other proceedings involving the same parties and subject matter. This constituted an abuse of the court process, as it amounted to instituting a multiplicity of actions on the same issue. The court emphasized that such conduct is not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 8015 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: The Monarch Insurance Company Limited; Respondent: Millicent Anyango Ochieng; Defendant: Silivester Mbaka; Defendant: Rana Autoselection Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 12 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal struck out as abuse of court process
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Abuse of Court Process, Multiplicity of Suits, Striking Out Appeals
- 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
The Monarch Insurance Company Limited
Appellant
Millicent Anyango Ochieng
Respondent
Silivester Mbaka
Defendant
Rana Autoselection Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal and the lower court matter constitute an abuse of court process.
- 2 Whether the appeal should be struck out for duplicity.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both the appeal and the lower court matter were duplicates of other proceedings involving the same parties and subject matter. This constituted an abuse of the court process, as it amounted to instituting a multiplicity of actions on the same issue. The court emphasized that such conduct is not permissible and undermines the integrity of judicial proceedings. Consequently, the appeal was struck out and costs awarded to the respondent.
Court Disposition
appeal struck out as abuse of court process
Orders
- This appeal is struck out.
- The appellant shall pay costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
(CORAM: CHERERE-J)
CIVIL APPEAL NO.12 OF 2018
BETWEEN
THE MONARCH INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED................APPELLANT
AND
MILLICENT ANYANGO OCHIENG...........................................RESPONDENT
AND
SILIVESTER MBAKA..............................................................1ST DEFENDANT
RANA AUTOSELECTION LTD.............................................2ND DEFENDANT
(Being an Appeal from the Ruling and Order in Kisumu CMCC No. 553 of 2015 by Hon. H.Adika (SRM) on 19th September, 2016)
JUDGMENT
Introduction
1. On 19th September, 2016, the Appellant’s application dated 21st July, 2016 seeking orders to stay the proceedings and to be enjoined as an interested party was dismissed for want of attendance by Appellant’s counsel.
2. The Appellant faults the learned trial magistrate for failing to consider the application on merit.
3. I have considered this appeal CIVIL APPEAL NO.12 OF 2018 which arose from CMCC No. 553 of 2015 LYDIA ACHIENG ODHIAMBO V SYLVESTER MBAKA & RANA AUTOSELECTION LTD and I have discovered that it is between the same parties and on the same issues as CIVIL APPEAL NO.11 OF 2018 which arose CMCC No. 552 of 2015 LYDIA ACHIENG ODHIAMBO V SYLVESTER MBAKA & RANA AUTO SELECTION LTD.
4. The two appeals and the two lower court matters are no doubt duplicates of each other.
5. The examples of abuse of court process are inexhaustible and involve situations where the process of court has not been resorted to fairly, properly and honestly to the detriment of the other party such as instituting a multiplicity of actions on the same subject matter, against the same opponent as is the case in CIVIL APPEAL NO.12 OF 2018 and CMCC No. 553 of 2015 LYDIA ACHIENG ODHIAMBO V SYLVESTER MBAKA & RANA AUTOSELECTION LTD.
Disposition
6. From the foregoing analysis, I have come to the conclusion that this appeal and Kisumu CMCC No. 553 of 2015 are an abuse of the court process.
7. Consequently, it is hereby ordered that:
1)This appeal be and is struck out.
2)The Appellant is condemned to pay costs to the Respondent
DATED AND DATED IN KISUMU THIS……27th…...DAY OF…..February….2020
T. W. CHERERE
JUDGE
Read in open court in the presence of-
Court Assistant - Amondi/Okodoi
For the Appellant - Mr Bagada hb for Mr.Cheruiyot
For the Respondent- N/A