[2011] KEHC 405 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 405 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant provided a credible and satisfactory explanation for the delay in seeking revival of the suit, namely that she was not informed by her previous advocate of the abatement and only became aware upon engaging new counsel. The court was satisfied that the applicant did not act in bad...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 405 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Wanjiku Mugo; Respondent: Peter Mbiri Michuki
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 62 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Revive Abated Suit
Outcome
Application to revive the suit allowed.
Legal Topics
Abatement of Suit, Revival of Suit, Substitution of Parties
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Abatement of Suit Revival of Suit Substitution of Parties

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

Elizabeth Wanjiku Mugo

Applicant

Peter Mbiri Michuki

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Revive Abated Suit

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient reason for the revival of the abated suit.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in seeking revival was excusable under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant provided a credible and satisfactory explanation for the delay in seeking revival of the suit, namely that she was not informed by her previous advocate of the abatement and only became aware upon engaging new counsel. The court was satisfied that the applicant did not act in bad faith or with indifference, and that the interests of justice would be served by allowing the suit to proceed on its merits. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application for revival of the suit, with costs to abide the outcome of the main suit.

Court Disposition

Application to revive the suit allowed.

Orders

  • The summons dated 2nd December 2009 is allowed; the suit is revived.
  • Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the suit.