Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutOriginating Summons filed 15th August 2014 (Notice of Motion dated 12th July 2017, filed 14th February 2018)· [2018] KEELC 1312 (KLR)

Michael Wafula Khaemba v Patrick Chepkondoli Mustuni & another [2018] KEELC 1312 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court (High Court)
18 October 2018
843 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court struck out an attempt to replace a deceased land claimant because no substitution application was filed within one year of his death.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The deceased, Michael Wafula Khaemba, filed an Originating Summons on 15th August 2014 claiming the parcel ELGON/KAPKATENY/115, registered in the name of the Respondent, by adverse possession. The Respondent was served but never filed a response. The deceased died on 20th August 2016. His son, Nicholas Wanyonyi Wafula, obtained a limited grant of letters of administration limited to the suit and moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 12th July 2017 but filed on 14th February 2018 seeking to be substituted as plaintiff. The Respondent filed grounds of opposition contending that the suit had abated, rendering the application incompetent and vexatious. The court, Boaz N. Olao J, observed that although the cause of action survived the deceased and the application itself was dated within one year of death, it was filed eighteen months after the death. Under Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, failure to apply for substitution within one year of a deceased sole plaintiff's death causes the suit to abate as far as the deceased plaintiff is concerned. The court held that the abated suit was, in law, dead and non-existent, and that enlarging time under Order 50 Rule 6 would be an academic exercise since there would be no suit to anchor the substitution. However, the court noted that the Applicant was not without remedy: he could first apply under Order 24 Rule 7(2) for revival of the abated suit and thereafter apply for substitution. The Notice of Motion was struck out with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the suit abated under Order 24 Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Holding

The suit abated because the substitution application was filed eighteen months after the deceased's death, beyond the one-year period prescribed

Reasoning

Order 24 Rule 3(1) requires the deceased plaintiff's legal representative to be joined where the cause of action survives, and Rule 3(2) provides that failure to apply within one year causes the suit to abate. The deceased died on 20th August 2016 and the application was filed on 14th February 2018, eighteen months later, so the suit abated by operation of law.

p. 1
02

Whether time could be enlarged under Order 50 Rule 6 to save the late substitution application

Holding

Enlargement of time was refused because in the absence of a subsisting suit the extension would serve no purpose

Reasoning

Although the application itself was dated 12th July 2017, within the one-year period, it was only filed on 14th February 2018. Counsel urged the court to enlarge time under Order 50 Rule 6, but the court held that once a suit has abated it is dead, and extending time would be an academic exercise; the proper course was first to apply for revival of the suit under Order 24 Rule 7(2).

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where no application for substitution of a deceased sole plaintiff is made within one year of death, the suit abates as against the deceased plaintiff and becomes dead and non-existent, and a substitution application filed outside that period without first reviving the suit is incompetent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 12th July 2017 and filed on 14th February 2018 is struck out
  2. 2.Costs of the application awarded to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 24 Rule 3(1) and 3(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 24 Rule 7(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 50 Rule 6
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules (substitution of a deceased sole plaintiff)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Michael Wafula Khaemba v Patrick Chepkondoli Mustuni & another [2018] KEELC 1312 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Originating Summons filed 15th August 2014 (Notice of Motion dated 12th July 2017, filed 14th February 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/1312/eng@2018-10-18

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.