[2008] KEHC 3426 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 3426 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent's defence raised serious triable issues, specifically the denial of having issued an insurance policy to the owner of the lorry and the assertion that no statutory notice was served. These matters require evidence to be adduced at trial and cannot be determined at the interlocutory stage. The court emphasized that the power to strike out pleadings should only be exercised in clear and obvious cases where the pleading is hopeless and beyond redemption. Since the defence disclosed triable issues, the application to strike it out did not meet the threshold under Order 6 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules and was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 3426 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Patrick Gitonga Mbaka; Defendant: Blue Shield Insurance Co. Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
12 May 2008
Case Number
Civil Case 46 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
SP Ouko
Legal Topics
Striking Out of Pleadings, Summary Judgment, Triable Issues, Insurance Liability
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Striking Out of Pleadings Summary Judgment Triable Issues Insurance Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Gitonga Mbaka

Plaintiff

Blue Shield Insurance Co. Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence filed by the respondent discloses a reasonable cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the defence is scandalous, frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of the court process.
  3. 3 Whether the application to strike out the defence meets the threshold under Order 6 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's defence raised serious triable issues, specifically the denial of having issued an insurance policy to the owner of the lorry and the assertion that no statutory notice was served. These matters require evidence to be adduced at trial and cannot be determined at the interlocutory stage. The court emphasized that the power to strike out pleadings should only be exercised in clear and obvious cases where the pleading is hopeless and beyond redemption. Since the defence disclosed triable issues, the application to strike it out did not meet the threshold under Order 6 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules and was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application to strike out the defence is dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.