[2014] KEHC 3533 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 3533 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff had not sufficiently progressed the suit and could not rely solely on ongoing negotiations or a pending appeal as justification for delay. However, in the interest of substantive justice, the court exercised its discretion to grant the Plaintiff additional time to comply with...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 3533 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Ramco Investment Limited; Defendant: Nairobi City Water and Sewerage Company Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 369 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Suit not dismissed; Plaintiff granted time to comply with pre-trial directions.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Case Management, Pre Trial Directions
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Case Management Pre Trial Directions

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramco Investment Limited

Plaintiff

Nairobi City Water and Sewerage Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the reasons advanced by the Plaintiff justify the delay in prosecuting the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff had not sufficiently progressed the suit and could not rely solely on ongoing negotiations or a pending appeal as justification for delay. However, in the interest of substantive justice, the court exercised its discretion to grant the Plaintiff additional time to comply with pre-trial directions and progress the suit, warning that failure to do so would result in dismissal.

Court Disposition

Suit not dismissed; Plaintiff granted time to comply with pre-trial directions.

Orders

  • Parties to comply with Order 11 and pre-trial directions within 60 days from the date of the ruling.
  • Matter to be mentioned on 26th September 2014 for confirmation of compliance.