[2015] KEHC 8086 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 8086 (KLR)

The court determined that the issues raised in the originating summons, particularly regarding the enforcement of a professional undertaking and the circumstances of delay, could not be adequately resolved on affidavit evidence alone. Exercising its discretion under Order 37 Rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 8086 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Moses Muchoki, Charles Njenga t/a Muchoki, Kangata Njenga & Co. Advocates; Defendant: Juliet Theuri t/a J. M. Theuri & Co. Advocates
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 372 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Originating Summons; Direction to Proceed as If Commenced by Plaint
Outcome
Originating summons to proceed as if commenced by plaint; further affidavits permitted; costs in the cause.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Professional Undertakings, Advocates Act Enforcement, Originating Summons Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Professional Undertakings Advocates Act Enforcement Originating Summons Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moses Muchoki, Charles Njenga t/a Muchoki, Kangata Njenga & Co. Advocates

Plaintiff

Juliet Theuri t/a J. M. Theuri & Co. Advocates

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Originating Summons; Direction to Proceed as If Commenced by Plaint

  1. 1 Whether the court should enforce a professional undertaking given by one advocate to another through originating summons.
  2. 2 Whether the matter can be determined solely on affidavit evidence or requires further pleadings and directions under Order 37 Rule 19.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the issues raised in the originating summons, particularly regarding the enforcement of a professional undertaking and the circumstances of delay, could not be adequately resolved on affidavit evidence alone. Exercising its discretion under Order 37 Rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court directed that the proceedings continue as if commenced by plaint, allowing for further pleadings and evidence. This approach ensures that all factual disputes, especially those concerning the cause of delay and the effect of any verbal undertakings by third parties, are properly ventilated and adjudicated.

Court Disposition

Originating summons to proceed as if commenced by plaint; further affidavits permitted; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • This cause of action shall continue as if it had been begun by filing a Plaint.
  • The originating summons and affidavits filed shall stand as pleadings.