[2024] KEELC 13405 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 13405 (KLR)

The court found that the 2nd defendant had died on 9.1.2021, as evidenced by the death certificate provided by the applicants' advocate. The plaintiff did not provide any material to challenge the authenticity of the death certificate. According to Order 24 rule 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, where a defendant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 13405 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Purity Wambui Muchangi (Suing as the manager and legal guardian of Francis Muchangi); Defendant: Lucky Summer Estate Co Ltd; Defendant: George Ruiru; Defendant: Samuel Nyongo Kiara; Defendant: Saler Kiara
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 347 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Declare Suit Abated or for Advocates to Cease Acting
Outcome
Application allowed in part; suit against 2nd defendant marked as abated; each party to bear own costs.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Abatement of Suit, Death of Defendant, Revival of Suit, Representation of Deceased Estate
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Abatement of Suit Death of Defendant Revival of Suit Representation of Deceased Estate

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Purity Wambui Muchangi (Suing as the manager and legal guardian of Francis Muchangi)

Plaintiff

Lucky Summer Estate Co Ltd

Defendant

George Ruiru

Defendant

Samuel Nyongo Kiara

Defendant

Saler Kiara

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Declare Suit Abated or for Advocates to Cease Acting

  1. 1 Whether the suit against the 2nd defendant should be declared abated due to his death.
  2. 2 Whether the advocates for the applicants should be allowed to cease acting for the 2nd defendant.
  3. 3 Whether the death certificate provided is sufficient proof of death in the absence of challenge by the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 2nd defendant had died on 9.1.2021, as evidenced by the death certificate provided by the applicants' advocate. The plaintiff did not provide any material to challenge the authenticity of the death certificate. According to Order 24 rule 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, where a defendant dies and no application is made within one year to substitute a legal representative, the suit abates by operation of law. The plaintiff's request for more time to investigate was rejected because, once abated, the suit is non-existent unless revived. Therefore, the application was allowed to the extent that the suit against the 2nd defendant was marked as abated.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; suit against 2nd defendant marked as abated; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The suit against the 2nd defendant is marked as abated.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs of the application.