[2023] KEHC 302 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had indeed obtained leave to file the present application, thus the respondent's objection on that ground was without basis and was rejected. However, the court held that the applicant failed to provide affidavit evidence demonstrating that the cases sought to be consolidated were...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 302 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Meshack Ochieng t/a Mecko Enterprises; Respondent: PS Ministry Of Education; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: CS National Treasury
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Case 029 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Consolidation of Suits
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- A Mabeya
- Legal Topics
- Consolidation of Suits, Leave of Court, Affidavit Evidence, Procedural Objections
- 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
Meshack Ochieng t/a Mecko Enterprises
Applicant
PS Ministry Of Education
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
CS National Treasury
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Consolidation of Suits
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for consolidation of suits was properly before the court in light of the objection regarding leave.
- 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient grounds for consolidation of the specified cases.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had indeed obtained leave to file the present application, thus the respondent's objection on that ground was without basis and was rejected. However, the court held that the applicant failed to provide affidavit evidence demonstrating that the cases sought to be consolidated were related, involved the same parties, or raised similar issues of law and fact. Additionally, one of the cases (Misc Civ Appl No 167 of 2018) had already been concluded, and there was nothing left to prosecute in that matter. As a result, the court determined that the application for consolidation lacked merit and dismissed it. The leave previously granted was deemed spent, and...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for consolidation is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Ochieng t/a Mecko Enterprises v PS Ministry of Education & 2 others (Miscellaneous Case 029 of 2021) [2023] KEHC 302 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (27 January 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 302 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)
Commercial and Tax
Miscellaneous Case 029 of 2021
A Mabeya, J
January 27, 2023
Between
Meshack Ochieng t/a Mecko Enterprises
Applicant
and
PS Ministry Of Education
1st Respondent
Attorney General
2nd Respondent
CS National Treasury
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. Beforecourt is an application dated October 11, 2022. It was brought under order 35 rule 1 (5) (2) and order 51 of the Civil Procedure.
2. The application sought orders that case numbers 445 of 2013, 029 of 2020 and E16 of 2018 be consolidated.
3. The application was supported by the supporting affidavit sworn by Meshak Ochieng on 11/10/2022.
4. The 2nd respondent opposed the application vide the grounds of opposition dated October 17, 2022 on grounds that the application was filed without leave.
5. The applicant filed submissions dated October 24, 2022.
6. I wish to deal with the issue of the respondent’s objection that the application was made without leave. The applicant submitted and demonstrated that on 14/4/2019, Muigai J granted leave to the applicant to make the present application. In this regard, the court agrees with the applicant that the said objection has no basis and should be rejected.
7. That paves the way for thecourt to consider the application on merit.
8. Thiscourthas considered the pleadings and submissions before it. The applicant sought to consolidate this matter with ‘case numbers 445 of 2013, 167 of 2018 and E16 of 2018’. Thecourtnotes that the pleadings for the said cases were not placed before court.
9. Further, the applicant did not demonstrate by way of affidavit evidence that the cases are related, the parties are the same or that similar issues of law and fact will arise in the subject cases for convenient determination of the matters. All that the applicant did was to make statements about what various courts have in the past ordered. It is not clear what the applicant intends to achieve with the intended consolidation.
10. In any event thecourt notes that in one of those matters to wit, Misc Civ Appl No 167 of 2018, the matter was concluded vide the ruling of 14/4/2018. In that matter, Muigai J granted the applicant leave to file the present proceedings. That matter in my view became concluded and there is nothing more that was left that can be prosecuted vide the current proceedings.
11. In the circumstances, this court is unable to grant the orders sought. Consequently, the application is without merit and is dismissed. It follows that, the leave granted by Muigai J on 14/4/2019 is spent. I make no order as to costs.
It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023. A. MABEYA, FCIArbJUDGE