[2011] KEHC 4153 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 4153 (KLR)

The court found that the application to strike out the suit against the 2nd defendant was incompetent as it failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Order 6 rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application was also muddled, lacking clarity as to the specific rule under which it was brought....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KEHC 4153 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Sasah General Merchants Ltd; Defendant: Christian Children’s Fund; Defendant: 2nd Defendant
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 20 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit Against 2nd Defendant
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
A Ali-Aroni
Legal Topics
Striking Out Pleadings, Privity of Contract, Joinder of Parties
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Striking Out Pleadings Privity of Contract Joinder 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sasah General Merchants Ltd

Plaintiff

Christian Children’s Fund

Defendant

2nd Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Suit Against 2nd Defendant

  1. 1 Whether the suit against the 2nd defendant should be struck out for lack of privity of contract.
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd defendant was improperly joined to the proceedings without a court order.
  3. 3 Whether the application is incompetent for failing to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application to strike out the suit against the 2nd defendant was incompetent as it failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Order 6 rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The application was also muddled, lacking clarity as to the specific rule under which it was brought. Furthermore, the court noted that the plaint had been amended by consent of all parties, and the applicant could not now renege on that consent. In accordance with Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, the court emphasized that matters should not be disposed of on technicalities and that the dispute could be more appropriately resolved through arbitration. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to strike out the suit against the 2nd defendant is dismissed.
  • Costs in the cause.