[2023] KEHC 23963 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 23963 (KLR)

The court found that the application dated 13/6/2023 sought the same relief as a previous application dated 12/4/2022, which had already been determined by a ruling delivered on 8/6/2023. Both applications involved the same parties, the same subject matter, and arose from the same disciplinary proceedings. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 23963 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: John Wacira Wambugu; Respondent: Disciplinary Tribunal Of The Law Society Of Kenya; Respondent: Monica Wanjiku Ngugi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E398 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application struck out as res judicata
Judges
JN Mulwa
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Temporary Injunctions, Stay of Execution, Account Reconciliation
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Res Judicata Temporary Injunctions Stay of Execution Account Reconciliation

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Wacira Wambugu

Appellant

Disciplinary Tribunal Of The Law Society Of Kenya

Respondent

Monica Wanjiku Ngugi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the application dated 13/6/2023 is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining execution of the order pending determination of the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the issue of account reconciliation renders the decretal sum contentious.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application dated 13/6/2023 sought the same relief as a previous application dated 12/4/2022, which had already been determined by a ruling delivered on 8/6/2023. Both applications involved the same parties, the same subject matter, and arose from the same disciplinary proceedings. The court held that all the issues raised in the instant application had been fully determined in the earlier ruling. Applying Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and relevant case law, the court concluded that the application was barred by the doctrine of res judicata and therefore could not be entertained. As the application was unopposed, no order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

application struck out as res judicata

Orders

  • The application dated 13/6/2023 is struck out for being res judicata.
  • There shall be no order as to costs.