[2013] KEHC 1979 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 1979 (KLR)

The court found that the petitioner sought to amend the petition to remove the prayer for division of matrimonial property, which was improperly included and is the subject of a separate suit. While the respondents argued that the amendment would prejudice them by nullifying their preliminary objection, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 1979 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: R C C; Respondent: E C C; Respondent: G C T
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
27 September 2013
Case Number
Divorce Cause 5 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Divorce Cause / Ruling on Application to Amend Petition
Outcome
application allowed with costs to the respondents
Legal Topics
Divorce Petition, Amendment of Pleadings, Matrimonial Property, Preliminary Objection
Source Language
english
Family and Children Divorce Petition Amendment of Pleadings Matrimonial Property Preliminary Objection

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R C C

Applicant

E C C

Respondent

G C T

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Cause / Ruling on Application to Amend Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner should be granted leave to amend the divorce petition to remove the prayer for division of matrimonial property.
  2. 2 Whether allowing the amendment would prejudice the respondents by taking away their preliminary objection.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the respondents if the amendment is allowed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petitioner sought to amend the petition to remove the prayer for division of matrimonial property, which was improperly included and is the subject of a separate suit. While the respondents argued that the amendment would prejudice them by nullifying their preliminary objection, the court held that any such prejudice could be compensated by costs. The court emphasized that amendments should be allowed if they do not cause irremediable prejudice and that the amendment would enable the court to focus on the real issues in dispute. Consequently, the court allowed the amendment and awarded costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application allowed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The summons dated 17/4/2013 for leave to amend the petition is allowed as prayed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.