Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2019] KEELC 1531 (KLR)

Joan Sabastian Mbaya & another v Samuel Koskei Too [2019] KEELC 1531 (KLR)

Not stated in the judgment
26 September 2019
1,519 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 Nairobi court set aside a default judgment entered against a land buyer whose lawyer failed to file a defence, letting him finally contest the case at trial.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling on the defendant/applicant's notice of motion dated 11 December 2018, brought under Order 40 rule 2(1), Order 45 rule 1(a), Order 22 rule 22 and Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, and Sections 1A, 1B, 1C, 63(e) and 80 of the Civil Procedure Act, seeking variation, review and/or setting aside of the ex parte judgment and leave to file a defence. The applicant blamed his former advocate's failure to file a defence, relying on authority that litigants should not suffer for their advocates' oversight. The respondents opposed, contending that lack of diligence and casualness are not genuine mistakes, that counsel had notice of hearing dates, and that the overriding objective could not aid the applicant. The court framed two issues: whether the application was brought in good time and was merited, and whether the defence raised triable issues. Relying on Maina vs Muriuki and Philip Chamwolo vs Augustine Kubende (as quoted in Isaac Moracha Ongwacho), the court found the applicant was represented by counsel who neglected to file a defence, that the application followed judgment of 22 October 2018 without undue delay, and that the draft defence and counterclaim raised triable issues, including the applicant's claim to have paid Kshs.11,500,000 over negotiations for the purchase of the suit property. The court allowed the application, set aside the ex parte judgment dated 17 October 2018 with all subsequent proceedings, orders and decree, granted leave to file a defence, counterclaim and/or set off within 21 days, awarded throw-away costs of Kshs.20,000 to the respondents, and gave the respondents costs of the application.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the failure to file a defence was attributable to the defendant and whether the application was brought in good time

Holding

The defendant was represented by counsel who neglected to file a defence; it was unclear whether counsel updated the defendant; the application, made after judgment of 22 October 2018, was brought without undue delay and deserved exercise of the court's discretion.

Reasoning

The court accepted that the defendant had instructed his former counsel to enter appearance and file a defence but the counsel failed to do so. It noted it could not establish whether counsel updated the client on the proceedings. Since judgment had been delivered only on 22 October 2018 and the application followed soon thereafter, it was brought in good time, justifying the exercise of discretion in the defendant's favour.

p. 2
02

Whether the draft defence and counterclaim raises triable issues

Holding

The draft defence and counterclaim and/or set off raises triable issues that ought to go to full trial, including the defendant's claim to have paid Kshs.11,500,000.

Reasoning

The court perused the draft defence and found the claim of payments totalling Kshs.11,500,000 to be an issue that could not be wished away. The respondents alleged the defendant's bank deposit annexures were fictitious or forged, itself a factual dispute resolvable only at trial. The parties did not dispute negotiations for purchase of the suit property and part payment, reinforcing that triable issues existed.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The discretion to set aside an ex parte judgment is intended to avoid injustice or hardship resulting from accident, inadvertence or excusable mistake or error.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The ex parte judgment dated 17th October 2018, and all subsequent proceedings, orders, decree, be and is hereby reviewed and/or set aside
  2. 2.The defendant/applicant is granted leave to file his statement of defence, counterclaim and/or set off within 21 days from the date of the ruling, in default the exparte judgment shall take effect
  3. 3.The defendant/applicant to pay the plaintiffs/respondents throw away costs of Kshs.20,000 within thirty (30) days
  4. 4.The plaintiffs/respondents shall have costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 40 rule 2(1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 45 rule 1(a)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 22 rule 22
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 51 rule 1
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B, 1C, 3, 3A, 63(e) and 80
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d)

Cases cited (15)

  • Bernadette Canute vs Herbert Sore Makatiani
    [2016] eKLR
  • Maina vs Muriuki
    [1984] KLR 407
  • Nyati [2002] Kenya Ltd vs Kenya Revenue Authority
    [2009] eKLR
  • Eldo City Ltd vs Corn Products Kenya Ltd & Another
    [2013] eKLR
  • Mercy Karimi Njeru & Another vs Kisima Real Estate Limited
    [2015] eKLR
  • Patriotic Guards Ltd vs James Kipchirchir Sambu
    [2018] eKLR
  • Osborn vs Bank of the United States
    22 US 738 [1824]
  • Tana and Athi Rivers Development Authority vs Jeremiah Kimigho Mwakio & 3 Others
    [2015] eKLR
  • Samuel Kiti Lewa vs Housing Finance Co. of Kenya Ltd & Another
    [2015] eKLR
  • Odoyo Osodo vs Rael Obara Ojuok & 4 Others
    [2017] eKLR
  • Hannah Wairimu Ngethe vs Francis Ng'ang'a and Another
    [2016] eKLR
  • Muchanga Investments Ltd vs Safaris unlimited (Africa) Ltd & 2 Others
    [2009] eKLR
  • Philip Chamwolo vs Augustine Kubende
    [1986] KLR 890
  • Isaac Moracha Ongwacho vs Dennis Willy & another
    [2005] eKLR
  • Evans vs Barton
    [1917] AC473
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent powers of the court; Order 40 rule 2(1), Order 45 rule 1(a), Order 22 rule 22, Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010; Sections 1A, 1B, 1C, 63(e) and 80 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Joan Sabastian Mbaya & another v Samuel Koskei Too [2019] KEELC 1531 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/1531/eng@2019-09-26

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