[2022] KEHC 16311 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 16311 (KLR)

The High Court held that the trial court correctly struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction because the appellant had not demonstrated that the statutory pre-litigation dispute resolution mechanisms under section 56 of the National Government Constituency Development Fund Act had been exhausted. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 16311 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Palvance Construction Ltd; Respondent: National Government Constituency Development Fund
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 20 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Judges
KW Kiarie
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Court, Contractual Disputes, Pre Litigation Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Jurisdiction of Court Contractual Disputes Pre Litigation Procedure

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Palvance Construction Ltd

Appellant

National Government Constituency Development Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit filed by the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant complied with the pre-litigation dispute resolution mechanism under section 56 of the National Government Constituency Development Fund Act.
  3. 3 Whether the appeal should be allowed and the suit reinstated.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the trial court correctly struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction because the appellant had not demonstrated that the statutory pre-litigation dispute resolution mechanisms under section 56 of the National Government Constituency Development Fund Act had been exhausted. The court emphasized that jurisdiction is fundamental and must exist at the time a decision is rendered; without it, the court cannot proceed or revive a matter. The appellant's arguments regarding compliance with the Act and the objectives of civil litigation could not override the statutory requirement for initial referral to the Board and, if necessary, arbitration. Since the dispute had...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.