[2019] KEHC 166 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 166 (KLR)

The court found that although the period of inactivity was fifteen months, this was only three months beyond the statutory threshold of twelve months under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court exercised its discretion not to dismiss the suit, noting that the delay was not egregious and that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 166 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Rafiki Microfinance Bank Limited; Defendant: Zenith Pharmaceuticals Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 607 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Notice to Show Cause / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause Regarding Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Suit not dismissed; plaintiff granted conditional leave to proceed.
Judges
F Tuiyott
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Case Management, Delay in Prosecution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Case Management Delay in Prosecution

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

Rafiki Microfinance Bank Limited

Plaintiff

Zenith Pharmaceuticals Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice to Show Cause / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause Regarding Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inactivity exceeding twelve months.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in prosecuting the suit justifies striking out the suit under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the period of inactivity was fifteen months, this was only three months beyond the statutory threshold of twelve months under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court exercised its discretion not to dismiss the suit, noting that the delay was not egregious and that the notice to show cause was issued by the court itself rather than on the defendant's application. However, the court imposed strict conditions requiring the plaintiff to prepare the suit for trial within thirty days, failing which the suit would stand dismissed automatically. Costs of the notice to show cause proceedings were awarded to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Suit not dismissed; plaintiff granted conditional leave to proceed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff shall within 30 days prepare the suit for trial and move court for case management conference.
  • Time computation to consider Order 50 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.