[2023] KEHC 18026 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 18026 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their application for review and release of funds. Specifically, they did not annex any court deposit receipts or concrete proof that the sum of Kshs. 1,850,675 was deposited in court as required by the interlocutory order of June...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 18026 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mrs Jeanne Odhalo; Plaintiff: Thomas Abuoga; Plaintiff: Samson Gachago; Plaintiff: Ben Ashihundu; Plaintiff: Christopher Ndichu Mbugua; Plaintiff: Wahome Timothy Gatheru; Plaintiff: Abraham Lisero; Defendant: City Council of Nairobi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 623 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Review and Release of Deposited Funds
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JN Mulwa
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Review of Orders, Security for Injunction, Proof of Payment, Release of Funds
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Interlocutory Orders Review of Orders Security for Injunction Proof of Payment Release of Funds

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Jeanne Odhalo

Plaintiff

Thomas Abuoga

Plaintiff

Samson Gachago

Plaintiff

Ben Ashihundu

Plaintiff

Christopher Ndichu Mbugua

Plaintiff

Wahome Timothy Gatheru

Plaintiff

Abraham Lisero

Plaintiff

City Council of Nairobi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Review and Release of Deposited Funds

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have provided sufficient evidence to warrant review and discharge of the interlocutory order issued on June 16, 2004.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the release of Kshs. 1,850,675 allegedly deposited in court as security for the interlocutory orders.
  3. 3 Whether the application can be granted in the absence of opposition from the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their application for review and release of funds. Specifically, they did not annex any court deposit receipts or concrete proof that the sum of Kshs. 1,850,675 was deposited in court as required by the interlocutory order of June 16, 2004. The schedule of payments prepared by their advocates was deemed insufficient in the absence of official court receipts. The court emphasized that it cannot grant orders based on unsubstantiated claims, even if the application is unopposed, as it is the duty of parties to place proper evidence before the court. Consequently, the application was dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' application dated July 12, 2022 is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.