[2021] KEHC 7918 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 7918 (KLR)

The court found that there was no evidence of transmission to the parties of the directions issued on 2nd November 2020, which were sent electronically due to COVID-19 restrictions. The dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution was therefore based on the mistaken assumption that the applicants had been served...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 7918 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Rev. Simon Ndungu Mungai; Applicant: Pastor Vincent Mungai Ndungu trading as Overcomers Christian Missions & Livelink Communications; Respondent: County Government of Kiambu; Respondent: County Finance Officer, Kiambu County Government; Respondent: County Secretary, Kiambu County Government
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E055 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Application for Review and Setting Aside of Dismissal Order
Outcome
Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; suit reinstated; leave granted to apply for mandamus; no order as to costs.
Judges
P Nyamweya
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Setting Aside Orders, Service of Court Orders, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Review of Judgment Setting Aside Orders Service of Court Orders Procedural Fairness

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rev. Simon Ndungu Mungai

Applicant

Pastor Vincent Mungai Ndungu trading as Overcomers Christian Missions & Livelink Communications

Applicant

County Government of Kiambu

Respondent

County Finance Officer, Kiambu County Government

Respondent

County Secretary, Kiambu County Government

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Application for Review and Setting Aside of Dismissal Order

  1. 1 Whether the court's dismissal order of 20th January 2021 should be set aside for want of proper service of directions on the applicants.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to reinstatement of their suit and leave to apply for orders of mandamus.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no evidence of transmission to the parties of the directions issued on 2nd November 2020, which were sent electronically due to COVID-19 restrictions. The dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution was therefore based on the mistaken assumption that the applicants had been served with the court's directions. In the interests of justice and procedural fairness, the court held that this constituted sufficient reason to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the suit. The applicants were granted leave to apply for an order of mandamus, and directions were issued for the electronic filing and service of pleadings in line with pandemic protocols.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; suit reinstated; leave granted to apply for mandamus; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicants' Notice of Motion dated 2nd February 2021 is certified urgent and admitted to hearing ex parte in the first instance.
  • The ruling and orders issued on 20th January 2021 are set aside; the suit and Chamber Summons dated 12th October 2020 are reinstated for hearing.