Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNot stated in judgment (suit commenced through plaint dated 8th November 2011)· [2018] KEELC 4500 (KLR)

Priska Onyango Ojuang’ & another v Henry Ojwang Nyabende [2018] KEELC 4500 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
21 February 2018
1,221 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court struck out a landowner's counterclaim because he filed it without a verifying affidavit and then waited over three years to fix the mistake.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Defendant, Henry Ojwang Nyabende, moved the court by notice of motion dated 7th February 2015 seeking leave to file and serve a verifying affidavit in support of his counterclaim out of time, invoking Article 159 of the Constitution and Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. The Plaintiffs opposed through grounds of opposition. The Plaintiffs' suit, commenced by plaint dated 8th November 2011, was properly accompanied by a verifying affidavit; the Defendant's defence and counterclaim filed on 21st November 2011 had none. The court held that under Order 7 Rule 5(a) read with Order 4 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, a defendant filing a counterclaim must accompany it with a verifying affidavit at filing, in the same way as a plaintiff with a plaint. A claim commenced without such an affidavit is improperly before the court and liable to be struck out, even on the court's own motion. The court further found that the Defendant's delay was inordinate: the application was lodged only days after the Plaintiffs filed submissions seeking striking out of the counterclaim, appearing designed to circumvent that move, and granting leave at that late stage would prejudice the Plaintiffs and delay the suit. The notice of motion was dismissed with costs and the counterclaim was struck out with costs for want of an accompanying verifying affidavit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a counterclaim filed without a verifying affidavit is a proper suit

Holding

No - it contravenes Order 7 Rule 5(a) read with Order 4 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules and is improperly before the court, liable to be struck out.

Reasoning

The court noted the Plaintiffs' plaint was accompanied by a verifying affidavit, but the Defendant's defence and counterclaim had none, contrary to Order 7 Rule 5(a) which requires an affidavit under Order 4 Rule 1(2) where there is a counterclaim. The Defendant stands as plaintiff in the counterclaim and bears the same obligation at filing. Non-compliance renders the counterclaim defective and liable to striking out.

p. 1
02

Whether a verifying affidavit can be filed long after the counterclaim

Holding

The court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the Defendant due to inordinate delay and prejudice to the Plaintiffs.

Reasoning

The application was filed only days after the Plaintiffs' submissions seeking striking out of the counterclaim, suggesting an attempt to circumvent that move. The Plaintiffs had closed their case by filing submissions on 23rd January 2015; allowing late filing at that stage would prejudice them and delay finalisation of the suit.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A defendant filing a counterclaim must file a verifying affidavit at the time the counterclaim is filed, in the same way a plaintiff must accompany a plaint with a verifying affidavit.
  • A claim commenced through a plaint or counterclaim without an accompanying verifying affidavit is improperly before the court and liable to be struck out.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 7th February 2015 is dismissed with costs
  2. 2.The Defendant's counterclaim contained in the statement of Defence dated 16th November 2011 and filed on 21st November 2011 is struck out with costs for failure to be accompanied by a verifying affidavit as required under Order 4 Rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 159
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 7 Rule 5(a)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 4 Rule 1(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 4 Rule 1(1)(f)
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159 of the Constitution 2010 and Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Priska Onyango Ojuang’ & another v Henry Ojwang Nyabende [2018] KEELC 4500 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment (suit commenced through plaint dated 8th November 2011). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2018/4500/eng@2018-02-21

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