[2019] KEELC 3310 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 3310 (KLR)

The court found that both the present suit and the earlier suit (Kakamega ELC No. 184 of 2015, now Mumias SPMELC No. 152 of 2018) involve the same parties and the same subject matter, specifically the suit land parcel E Wanga/Libinu/766 and its subdivision E Wanga/Libinu/4223. The court noted that both matters were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 3310 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Patrick Akoi Abwoto; Defendant: Fedelis Onjari Masanyi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 8 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit as Sub Judice
Outcome
suit struck out as sub judice with costs to the applicant
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Sub Judice, Abuse of Court Process, Striking Out Suit, Duplicity of Suits, Land Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Sub Judice Abuse of Court Process Striking Out Suit Duplicity of Suits Land Ownership Disputes

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

Patrick Akoi Abwoto

Plaintiff

Fedelis Onjari Masanyi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit as Sub Judice

  1. 1 Whether the present suit is sub judice in light of a previously instituted suit involving the same subject matter and parties.
  2. 2 Whether the suit amounts to an abuse of the court process due to duplicity.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the present suit and the earlier suit (Kakamega ELC No. 184 of 2015, now Mumias SPMELC No. 152 of 2018) involve the same parties and the same subject matter, specifically the suit land parcel E Wanga/Libinu/766 and its subdivision E Wanga/Libinu/4223. The court noted that both matters were brought by way of originating summons and that the sale agreements relied upon are the same. The earlier suit is still pending and has not been stayed. The court held that the present proceedings are directly and substantially in issue in the previously instituted suit, and thus, the present suit is sub judice. The court further held that the correct procedure, if the applicant...

Court Disposition

suit struck out as sub judice with costs to the applicant

Orders

  • The suit is struck out as sub judice.
  • Costs of the application and the suit are awarded to the applicant.