[2024] KEHC 11352 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 11352 (KLR)

The court held that the application dated 20/2/2024 could not be reinstated because the defect of the uncommissioned affidavit had not been cured. In Kenyan law, an unsworn affidavit is a nullity and cannot support an application. The applicant failed to take any remedial steps, such as filing a supplementary...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 11352 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Nyala Dairy Multi-Purpose Coop Society Ltd; Respondent: Nyandarua County Government; Respondent: Nyandarua County Assembly
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyandarua
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition E001 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal
Outcome
application rejected; directions issued for main petition
Judges
CM Kariuki
Legal Topics
Affidavit Requirements, Application Dismissal, Reinstatement of Application
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Affidavit Requirements Application Dismissal Reinstatement of Application

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

Nyala Dairy Multi-Purpose Coop Society Ltd

Applicant

Nyandarua County Government

Respondent

Nyandarua County Assembly

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal

  1. 1 Whether an application can be reinstated where the supporting affidavit was not commissioned and remains unsworn.
  2. 2 Whether the court should set aside the dismissal of the application for non-attendance and non-commissioning of the affidavit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application dated 20/2/2024 could not be reinstated because the defect of the uncommissioned affidavit had not been cured. In Kenyan law, an unsworn affidavit is a nullity and cannot support an application. The applicant failed to take any remedial steps, such as filing a supplementary affidavit or seeking leave to amend, despite being aware of the defect. The court found that the omission was not inadvertent but a failure to comply with mandatory legal requirements. Consequently, the application was rejected, and directions were given for parties to proceed with submissions on the main petition.

Court Disposition

application rejected; directions issued for main petition

Orders

  • The application dated 20/2/2024 is rejected with orders in the main cause.
  • Parties to file and serve submissions on the pending Petition and exchange within 30 days.