[2022] KEHC 12644 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 12644 (KLR)

The court found that the application dated 2nd March 2017 had not been prosecuted for over four years, and Kenya Pipeline Co. Ltd had shown no intention to proceed with it, even after being served with the dismissal application. The court held that it has jurisdiction to dismiss matters for want of prosecution where...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 12644 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Aruna Kivuvo; Applicant: Kenya Pipeline Company Limited; Interested Party: Delina General Enterprises Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Makueni
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 19 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Application for dismissal allowed; application dated 2nd March 2017 dismissed for want of prosecution; interim stay orders vacated; parties to bear own costs.
Judges
GMA Dulu
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Interim Stay Orders, Jurisdiction to Dismiss, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Criminal Law Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Delay in Prosecution Interim Stay Orders Jurisdiction to Dismiss Abuse of Court Process

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Aruna Kivuvo

Defendant

Kenya Pipeline Company Limited

Applicant

Delina General Enterprises Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the application dated 2nd March 2017 should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inaction for over four years.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to dismiss an application for want of prosecution in criminal or civil proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the interim stay orders should be vacated.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application dated 2nd March 2017 had not been prosecuted for over four years, and Kenya Pipeline Co. Ltd had shown no intention to proceed with it, even after being served with the dismissal application. The court held that it has jurisdiction to dismiss matters for want of prosecution where there is undue delay, regardless of whether the proceedings are civil or criminal. Since the applicant failed to take any steps to progress the application and the Interested Party had properly moved the court, the application dated 2nd March 2017 was dismissed for want of prosecution. The interim stay orders were vacated, and each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Court Disposition

Application for dismissal allowed; application dated 2nd March 2017 dismissed for want of prosecution; interim stay orders vacated; parties to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The application dated 2nd March 2017 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • Interim stay orders granted by this court are hereby vacated.