[2025] KEHC 2842 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 2842 (KLR)

The court held that the 2nd defendant's request for particulars was, in substance, a request for evidence in the form of documents, which is properly addressed through the process of discovery and not through a request for particulars. The court emphasized that pleadings should contain material facts and necessary...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 2842 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Peevans East Africa Limited; Defendant: Paul Wanderi Ndungu; Defendant: Asenath Wachera Maina
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Commercial Case E002 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Ruling on Application for Further Particulars
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Pleadings Particulars, Discovery Process, Striking Out Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Pleadings Particulars Discovery Process Striking Out Pleadings

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peevans East Africa Limited

Plaintiff

Paul Wanderi Ndungu

Defendant

Asenath Wachera Maina

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Ruling on Application for Further Particulars

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd defendant is entitled to further particulars as requested in her application dated 31/10/2023.
  2. 2 Whether the request for particulars amounts to a request for evidence rather than material facts required in pleadings.
  3. 3 Whether the relevant paragraphs of the plaint should be struck out for lack of particulars.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the 2nd defendant's request for particulars was, in substance, a request for evidence in the form of documents, which is properly addressed through the process of discovery and not through a request for particulars. The court emphasized that pleadings should contain material facts and necessary particulars, but not evidence, and that the provision of particulars is intended to clarify the case to be met, not to facilitate a fishing expedition for evidence. Since the 2nd defendant's application sought documents and information that would be subject to discovery and cross-examination at trial, the court found the application misconceived and dismissed it. The court...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 31/10/2023 is dismissed.
  • Costs to be in the cause.