[1932] EACA 38

[1932] EACA 38

The court held that it retains the power to hear and determine an application for directions under Order I, Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Ordinance, even after a consent judgment has been entered between the plaintiff and the defendants. The absence of provisions in the Kenya Rules corresponding to English Order XVIA, Rule 3 and Rule 7(2), does not deprive the court of this power. The court relied on the reasoning in Gloucester Banking Co., Ltd. v. Phillips Creagh, where post-judgment applications for directions and even summary judgment against a third party were permitted. The court found no substantive difference in principle between entering judgment by consent and paying the claim...

Citation
[1932] EACA 38
Parties
Plaintiff: Christeven Patrick Brooks; Defendant: Isher Kaur; Defendant: Narinder Singh; Third Party: Brown & Barratt, Ltd.
Court
East African Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Judgment Date
1 January 1932
Case Number
C.C. 234/32.
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Application for Directions After Consent Judgment
Outcome
Objection by third party disallowed; application for directions may proceed.
Judges
Thomas, J. (Kenya)
Legal Topics
Third Party Procedure, Consent Judgment, Application for Directions, Order I Rule 18, Indemnity, Trial Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Third Party Procedure Consent Judgment Application for Directions Order I Rule 18 Indemnity Trial Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christeven Patrick Brooks

Plaintiff

Isher Kaur

Defendant

Narinder Singh

Defendant

Brown & Barratt, Ltd.

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Application for Directions After Consent Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has power to hear an application for directions under Order I, Rule 18, after judgment has been entered by consent of the defendants at whose instance third party proceedings were commenced.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of provisions in the Kenya Rules corresponding to English Order XVIA, Rule 3 and Rule 7(2), precludes the court from making such orders after judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it retains the power to hear and determine an application for directions under Order I, Rule 18 of the Civil Procedure Ordinance, even after a consent judgment has been entered between the plaintiff and the defendants. The absence of provisions in the Kenya Rules corresponding to English Order XVIA, Rule 3 and Rule 7(2), does not deprive the court of this power. The court relied on the reasoning in Gloucester Banking Co., Ltd. v. Phillips Creagh, where post-judgment applications for directions and even summary judgment against a third party were permitted. The court found no substantive difference in principle between entering judgment by consent and paying the claim...

Court Disposition

Objection by third party disallowed; application for directions may proceed.

Orders

  • The objection by the third party is disallowed.
  • The costs of this objection will be the defendants' in any event.