[2018] KEHC 10245 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 10245 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiffs had failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit since 31st May 2017, despite being served for subsequent court dates. The absence of the plaintiffs and their advocates demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The court concluded that there was no justification to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 10245 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Victor Makau Wambua; Plaintiff: Zaccheus Mwalyo Bernard; Defendant: Equity Bank Limited; Defendant: Lazarus Kinyumu t/a Spectrum Auctioneers Ltd; Defendant: Purple Royal Auctioneers; Defendant: Credit Reference Bureau Africa Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 150 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th defendants. File ordered closed.
Judges
MM Kasango
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Case Management, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Case Management Costs Award

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Victor Makau Wambua

Plaintiff

Zaccheus Mwalyo Bernard

Plaintiff

Equity Bank Limited

Defendant

Lazarus Kinyumu t/a Spectrum Auctioneers Ltd

Defendant

Purple Royal Auctioneers

Defendant

Credit Reference Bureau Africa Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded to the defendants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs had failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit since 31st May 2017, despite being served for subsequent court dates. The absence of the plaintiffs and their advocates demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter. The court concluded that there was no justification to keep the suit on record and that the defendants were entitled to dismissal of the suit for want of prosecution, together with costs.

Court Disposition

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th defendants. File ordered closed.

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed against all defendants for want of prosecution.
  • Costs of the suit and of the notice of motion dated 25th June 2018 are awarded to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th defendants.