[2014] KEHC 2240 (KLR)
The court found that there was a possibility that the plaintiff's advocates were not properly served with the Notice to Show Cause prior to the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. Given that the application to reinstate the suit was not opposed and considering the importance of proper service to ensure...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 2240 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Nizar Hudani Associates; Defendant: The Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 196 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Reinstate Suit After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Application to reinstate suit allowed; suit reinstated.
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Service of Notice, Application for Reinstatement
- 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
Nizar Hudani Associates
Plaintiff
The Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Reinstate Suit After Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution should be set aside and the suit reinstated.
- 2 Whether proper service of the Notice to Show Cause was effected on the plaintiff's advocates.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was a possibility that the plaintiff's advocates were not properly served with the Notice to Show Cause prior to the dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution. Given that the application to reinstate the suit was not opposed and considering the importance of proper service to ensure fairness, the court allowed the application and reinstated the suit, with costs in the cause.
Court Disposition
Application to reinstate suit allowed; suit reinstated.
Orders
- The suit is reinstated.
- Costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
COMMERCIAL & ADMIRALTY DIVISION
CIVIL SUIT NO. 196 OF 2010
NIZAR HUDANI ASSOCIATES.........................................PLAINTIFF
(A firm of Consulting Engineers whose
Sole proprietor is Niazar Hudani)
VERSUS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL...........................................DEFENDANT
(On behalf of the Government of Kenya
and the Ministry of roads and Public Works)
R U L I N G
1. On 23rd May 2014 this court dismissed the suit within for want of prosecution. The Notice of Motion before the court dated 11th June 2014 seeks to reinstate the suit.
2. In support of the application Simon Mauncho has sworn an affidavit dated 11th June 2014 in which he has stated, inter-a-alia, that the said dismissal was mistaken in that the advocates on record Mauncho & Company Advocates for the Plaintiff were not served with Notice to Show Cause dated 29th April 2014, and that the same was erroneously served on Messrs Michael David & Associates who were not on record for the Plaintiff. He further states that the parties to the suit wish to finalise the matter through the court process.
3. I have considered the application. It is not opposed. I have also considered the possibility that the advocates on record for the Plaintiff may not have been properly served with the said Notice to Show Cause.
I allow the application as prayed with costs in the cause.
Orders accordingly.
DATED, READ AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014
E. K. O. OGOLA
JUDGE
PRESENT:
Wati holding brief for Maunjo for Plaintiff
M/s Kilei for Defendant
Irene – Court Clerk