[2007] KEHC 3023 (KLR)

[2007] KEHC 3023 (KLR)

The court found that both the cause of action and the residence of the defendant were in Mombasa. Section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act mandates that suits be filed where the defendant resides or where the cause of action arose. The court rejected the respondent's arguments that the applicant should have sought...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] KEHC 3023 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Salim Ali Ringi; Respondent: Diamond Trust Bank Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 575 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Transfer of Suits, Jurisdiction of Courts, Venue of Trial
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Transfer of Suits Jurisdiction of Courts Venue of Trial

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

Salim Ali Ringi

Appellant

Diamond Trust Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be transferred from the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Milimani, Nairobi to the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa for hearing and final disposal.
  2. 2 Whether the Nairobi court has jurisdiction given the residence of the defendant and the place where the cause of action arose.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was required to seek review of the previous transfer order from the High Court at Nairobi.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the cause of action and the residence of the defendant were in Mombasa. Section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act mandates that suits be filed where the defendant resides or where the cause of action arose. The court rejected the respondent's arguments that the applicant should have sought review in Nairobi or that an admission of jurisdiction in the defence was binding, especially since such admission was made before the suit was transferred to the lower court. The court held that the applicant was within his rights to seek transfer and that the Nairobi court did not have jurisdiction merely by virtue of the parties' consent or prior admissions. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Civil Suit Number 6463 of 2005 at the Chief Magistrate’s Milimani Nairobi is hereby transferred to the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa for hearing and final disposal.