[2014] KEHC 851 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 851 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to appear on the scheduled hearing date for the Notice to Show Cause and had not filed any response despite being granted an adjournment for that purpose. The Plaintiff's conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit. Consequently, the court exercised its...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 851 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Naivasha Self Service Store Limited; Defendant: Capital Motors Exhibition Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 133 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the Defendant.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Notice to Show Cause, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Notice to Show Cause Costs Award

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Naivasha Self Service Store Limited

Plaintiff

Capital Motors Exhibition Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to the Notice to Show Cause.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff has demonstrated interest in prosecuting the suit.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to appear on the scheduled hearing date for the Notice to Show Cause and had not filed any response despite being granted an adjournment for that purpose. The Plaintiff's conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Rules to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution. The Defendant, having attended and supported the application, was awarded the costs of the suit.

Court Disposition

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the Defendant.

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to the Notice to Show Cause dated 16th September 2014.
  • The costs of the suit are awarded to the Defendant.