[2020] KEELC 2710 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 2710 (KLR)

The court found that both the Plaintiff and Defendant had died, and no application for substitution was made within one year of their respective deaths. By operation of Order 24 Rules 3(2) and 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the suit abated as to both parties. There was no subsisting suit in which the Applicant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 2710 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Stanley Alukonya Ndibire (suing through Guardian and next friend Selina Ndibire); Defendant: John Lukoye (suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Atanas Mukobero)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 408 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Substitution and Amendment of Defence
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
SM Kibunja
Legal Topics
Abatement of Suit, Substitution of Parties, Amendment of Pleadings, Death of Party, Judgment Enforcement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Abatement of Suit Substitution of Parties Amendment of Pleadings Death of Party Judgment Enforcement

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Alukonya Ndibire (suing through Guardian and next friend Selina Ndibire)

Plaintiff

John Lukoye (suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of Atanas Mukobero)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Substitution and Amendment of Defence

  1. 1 Whether the suit has abated on the death of the Plaintiff and/or Defendant and if so, when.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant has made a reasonable case for substitution for the Defendant and amendment of the draft defence.
  3. 3 Who pays the costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the Plaintiff and Defendant had died, and no application for substitution was made within one year of their respective deaths. By operation of Order 24 Rules 3(2) and 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the suit abated as to both parties. There was no subsisting suit in which the Applicant could be substituted or in which an amended defence could be filed. Furthermore, judgment had already been delivered before the Plaintiff's death, and there was no application to set aside the judgment or reinstate the abated suit. Consequently, the application for substitution and amendment of defence was without merit and was dismissed with costs to the Respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Motion dated 16th January, 2020 is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.