[2023] KEHC 26011 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 26011 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants' failure to comply with the order to file submissions was due to inadvertence following a change of counsel, and that the omission was not deliberate. The court held that the respondent would not suffer prejudice that could not be compensated by costs. In the interest of justice,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 26011 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Dancun Wagura Mugo; Applicant: Stephen Muiruri; Respondent: Collins Ouma Opiyo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Miscellaneous Application E538 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Application
Outcome
application allowed with conditions
Judges
AN Ongeri
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Application, Setting Aside Dismissal, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Reinstatement of Application Setting Aside Dismissal Non Compliance With Court Orders Exercise of Judicial Discretion

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dancun Wagura Mugo

Applicant

Stephen Muiruri

Applicant

Collins Ouma Opiyo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Application

  1. 1 Whether the application dated 6/9/2022 should be reinstated for hearing and determination.
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal of the application for non-compliance with court orders should be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' failure to comply with the order to file submissions was due to inadvertence following a change of counsel, and that the omission was not deliberate. The court held that the respondent would not suffer prejudice that could not be compensated by costs. In the interest of justice, the court exercised its discretion to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the application, subject to the applicants paying thrown away costs and complying with fresh directions on filing submissions. The court emphasized that failure to comply with the new directions would result in automatic dismissal of the application.

Court Disposition

application allowed with conditions

Orders

  • The application is allowed.
  • The applicants shall pay thrown away costs of Kshs. 10,000 to the respondent.