John Gitau Mungai v Stephen Thuku Kabebe & 3 others [2014] KEELC 404 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether to grant leave to re-amend the plaint and join the Lamu Land Control Board
The application was allowed; the joinder of the Land Control Board was necessary to determine the pleaded issues of fraud.
The court held that the Defendants had not shown any injustice or injury not compensable by costs. Joining the Land Control Board, which allegedly issued the consent to transfer the suit property, was necessary for determining the fraud issues and would avoid a multiplicity of suits, enabling the court to effectually and completely determine all questions involved.
Whether the objection that the Amended Plaint was filed out of time and irregularly defeats the amendment application
No such objection could succeed without a formal application to strike out; there being none before the court, the objection failed.
The court noted that although the Defendants argued that the proposed re-amended plaint was premised on an irregularly filed Amended Plaint, there was no application before the court to strike out that Amended Plaint. The objection therefore could not be raised in opposition to the current application, and a formal application was required.
Legal principles established
#- A party whose pleadings were filed out of time must file a formal application to have them struck out; such an objection cannot be raised in opposition to an amendment application.
- Amendments should be freely allowed at any stage unless they occasion injustice not compensable by costs, and joinder is proper where necessary for complete adjudication.
Court orders
#- 1.Leave granted to the Plaintiffs to re-amend their amended Plaint out of time in the manner set out in the annexed Re-Draft Amended Plaint
- 2.The Lamu Land Control Board to be enjoined in the suit
- 3.Re-amended Plaints to be filed and served within 14 days from the date of the Ruling upon payment of requisite fees
- 4.Application dated 30th January 2014 allowed in this matter and in Malindi HCCC No. 66 of 2012 as prayed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 8 Rules 3(1), (2) and 5 and Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "John Gitau Mungai v Stephen Thuku Kabebe & 3 others [2014] KEELC 404 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Malindi HCCC (as per judgment; consolidated with Malindi HCCC No. 66 of 2012). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2014/404/eng@2014-05-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.