[2014] KEHC 982 (KLR)
The court found that the application to amend the plaint was unopposed and that the preliminary objection was not prosecuted. Even if it had been, there was nothing in the application that amounted to an abuse of the court process or that was frivolous, vexatious, or bad in law. The court emphasized the general rule...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 982 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sebastian Njogu Njagi; Plaintiff: Catherine Wanjiru Njogu; Defendant: Janeffer Wakuthii Munyi; Defendant: Teressa Wambui Muriithi; Defendant: James Waiyaki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 7 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Amend Plaint
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- BN Olao
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Leave to Amend, Preliminary Objection, Civil Procedure Rules
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sebastian Njogu Njagi
Plaintiff
Catherine Wanjiru Njogu
Plaintiff
Janeffer Wakuthii Munyi
Defendant
Teressa Wambui Muriithi
Defendant
James Waiyaki
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Amend Plaint
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs should be granted leave to amend the plaint before commencement of trial.
- 2 Whether the application to amend the plaint is frivolous, vexatious, bad in law, or an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to amend the plaint was unopposed and that the preliminary objection was not prosecuted. Even if it had been, there was nothing in the application that amounted to an abuse of the court process or that was frivolous, vexatious, or bad in law. The court emphasized the general rule that amendments should be allowed to enable the real issues in dispute to be litigated, particularly at an early stage before trial has commenced. The amendment sought was to allow the applicants to properly articulate their claim, and there was no good reason to disallow it. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment, with the draft amended plaint...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 2nd September, 2013 seeking amendment to the plaint is allowed.
- The draft amended plaint shall be deemed as duly filed upon payment of requisite fees.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERUGOYA
ELC CASE NO. 7 OF 2013
SEBASTIAN NJOGU NJAGI …………………………………….…………1ST PLAINTIFF
CATHERINE WANJIRU NJOGU …………………………………………..2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JANEFFER WAKUTHII MUNYI …………………………………………1ST DEFENDANT
TERESSA WAMBUI MURIITHI …………………………………………2ND DEFENDANT
JAMES WAIYAKI ……………………………………………..…………..3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
This is in respect to the plaintiffs/applicants’ application dated 2nd September, 2013 seeking leave to amend the plaint herein in terms of the draft amended plaint which is annexed thereto. The same is supported by the affidavit of CATHERINE WANJIRU NJOGU the 2nd plaintiff herein.
The application is not opposed but there is a Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 15th October, 2013 to the effect that the said application is frivolous, vexatious, bad in law and an abuse of the Court process and further, that the same does not comply with the provisions of Order 1 Rule 13 or Order 4 Rule 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
When the matter came up before me on 14th October, 2014, Mr. Munene holding brief for Ms Munene for the Plaintiffs/applicants urged me to grant the orders sought as the same was not opposed.
I have considered the application to amend. The same is un-opposed and the Preliminary Objection raised was never prosecuted and even if it was, I see nothing in the application that amounts to an abuse of the Court process or is frivolous, vexatious or bad in law. As a general rule, the Court has powers to allow amendment of pleadings so as to enable the real issues in dispute to be litigated. Under the Civil Procedure Rules, the parties can amend their pleadings with leave of the Court at any time before judgment and indeed even after trial has commenced. The amendment sought herein is to enable the applicants “properly articulate their claim before this Court”. There would be no good reason to disallow a party amend his pleadings more so at this early stage where the trial is yet to commence.
Accordingly I allow the Notice of Motion dated 2nd September, 2013 seeking an amendment to the plaint. The draft amended plaint shall be deemed as duly filed upon payment of the requisite fees. The defendants are at liberty to amend their defence if they so wish within 15 days of service upon them of the amended plaint.
Costs in the cause.
B.N. OLAO
JUDGE
3RD DECEMBER, 2014
3/12/2014
Before
B.N. Olao – Judge
Mwangi – CC
Ms Kiragu for Ms Munene for Plaintiff – present
Mr. Ndegwa for Mr. Mwai for Defendant – present
COURT: Ruling delivered in open Court this 3rd day of December, 2014
Ms Kiragu for Ms Munene for Plaintiff present
Mr. Ndegwa for Mr. Mwai for Defendant present.
B.N. OLAO
JUDGE
3RD DECEMBER, 2014