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 the judgment· [2019] KEELC 434 (KLR)

Shakila Begum Ali (as personal representative of the Estate of the Late Mehboob Mohamed Abdul Gafoor Mohamed Mulah also known as Mehboob Mohamed Abdulgafoor and Mehboob Mullah) v Vescon Properties Limited & another [2019] KEELC 434 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
28 November 2019
1,497 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled it cannot revive a case it already dismissed for delay, so the party must appeal or seek review instead.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a ruling on a notice of motion dated 22nd November 2018 in which the plaintiff, Shakila Begum Ali, sought reinstatement of her suit which had been dismissed on 1st November 2018 for want of prosecution following a notice to show cause under Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The plaintiff explained that she had been misled by her previous advocates, who advised that a valuation report was needed, and that she only learned of the dismissal listing on 29th October 2018, whereupon she changed advocates on 1st November 2018; her advocate appeared before Matheka, J but the reasons given were held insufficient and the suit was dismissed. The 1st defendant, Praful Velji Halai, opposed the application, alleging the plaintiff's indolence and delay, and contending that once the court dismissed the suit on merit it became functus officio, leaving appeal as the only remedy. Yano, J framed a single issue: whether the court had jurisdiction to reinstate the suit or was functus officio. Applying the Supreme Court's jurisprudence in Raila Odinga and Menginya Salim Murgani, the court held that the dismissal of 1st November 2018 was a decision made in accordance with law after the plaintiff was heard, that the court was therefore functus officio, and that it could not sit on appeal over its own decision or that of a court of concurrent jurisdiction. The application was dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court had jurisdiction to reinstate a suit dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2, or whether it was functus officio

Holding

The court held that the dismissal of 1st November 2018 was a decision made in accordance with law after the plaintiff was heard; the court was therefore functus officio and had no jurisdiction to entertain the reinstatement application, the remedy being review or appeal.

Reasoning

The court traced the functus officio doctrine from Raila Odinga (citing Pretorius) and Jersey Evening Post Ltd v Al Thani, and from the Supreme Court's decision in Menginya Salim Murgani v Kenya Revenue Authority. A suit ends when a court renders a decision and that decision is effected. The dismissal of 1st November 2018 followed a duly served notice to show cause at which the applicant's advocate appeared and was heard but the reasons given were found insufficient. The dismissal was therefore a lawful final decision; the judge could not sit on appeal over a decision of a court of concurrent jurisdiction.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Once a court has delivered a decision and it has been effected, the court becomes functus officio and an aggrieved party must pursue appeal or review; a court cannot sit on appeal over its own decision or that of a court of concurrent jurisdiction

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The notice of motion dated 22nd November 2018 is dismissed with costs to the defendants

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B and 3A
  • Constitution of KenyaArticles 49 and 159(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 15
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 17 Rule 2

Cases cited (2)

  • Raila Odinga & 2 Others –v- Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission & 3 Others
    (2013) eKLR
  • Menginya Salim Murgani –v- Kenya Revenue Authority
    (2014) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Articles 49 and 159(2) of the Constitution, Order 51 Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules; the court found it had no jurisdiction as it was functus officio

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Shakila Begum Ali (as personal representative of the Estate of the Late Mehboob Mohamed Abdul Gafoor Mohamed Mulah also known as Mehboob Mohamed Abdulgafoor and Mehboob Mullah) v Vescon Properties Limited & another [2019] KEELC 434 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/434/eng@2019-11-28

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