[2020] KEHC 2275 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2275 (KLR)

The court found that the ex parte Applicants had complied with its directions by filing the substantive Notice of Motion dated 18th August 2020 and serving the same on the Respondents, as evidenced by the affidavit of service on record. The Respondents' application to strike out the proceedings for alleged...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2275 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Pharmaceutical Association; Applicant: Patrick Oduor Adera; Applicant: Peter Atandi Mogere; Respondent: Chitechi Amboka; Respondent: Williamson Chumba; Respondent: Joel Chege; Respondent: Fredrick Kiio
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application E052 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Respondents' application dismissed; directions issued for further conduct of the substantive application.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Procedure, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Striking Out Applications
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Judicial Review Procedure Non Compliance With Court Orders Striking Out Applications

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

Kenya Pharmaceutical Association

Applicant

Patrick Oduor Adera

Applicant

Peter Atandi Mogere

Applicant

Chitechi Amboka

Respondent

Williamson Chumba

Respondent

Joel Chege

Respondent

Fredrick Kiio

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the Respondents' application to strike out proceedings for non-compliance with court orders is merited.
  2. 2 Whether the ex parte Applicants complied with the court's directions regarding filing and service of the substantive Notice of Motion.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the ex parte Applicants had complied with its directions by filing the substantive Notice of Motion dated 18th August 2020 and serving the same on the Respondents, as evidenced by the affidavit of service on record. The Respondents' application to strike out the proceedings for alleged non-compliance was therefore without any justifiable basis. The court emphasized that striking out proceedings is a drastic remedy that should only be granted where there is clear evidence of non-compliance, which was not the case here. Consequently, the Respondents' application was dismissed, and directions were issued for the continued hearing of the substantive application.

Court Disposition

Respondents' application dismissed; directions issued for further conduct of the substantive application.

Orders

  • The Respondents' Notice of Motion dated 18th September 2020 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • Respondents and Interested Parties to file and serve responses to the ex parte Applicants' Notice of Motion dated 18th August 2020 within fourteen days.