Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedNotice of Motion dated 19th November 2015 (ELC, Kerugoya)· [2019] KEELC 1579 (KLR)

Lucy Wambui Muriithi & 2 others v Dorcase Muthoni Karani & 5 others [2019] KEELC 1579 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
20 September 2019
1,412 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 refused to add a third party to a land dispute because the applicants couldn't show any real link between him and the case.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a ruling on a Notice of Motion dated 19th November 2015 brought by the defendants under Order 1 Rules 3, 11 and 14 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 1A and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, seeking to enjoin Johnson Wachira Kibui as a co-defendant and third party in a land dispute, and to have a third party notice issue to him. The applicants contended that Kibui was the administrator of the Estate of Rubui Kabagi, had sold part of the parcel to the plaintiffs, and that his presence would help clarify issues regarding the estate. The proposed party opposed the application, asserting that any issues between him and the defendants had been resolved in ELC No. 9 of 2012 (Kerugoya) and Misc. Succession Cause No. 8 of 2005 (Embu), and that the application was an abuse of process. The plaintiff filed grounds of objection. The court framed two issues: whether a third party notice should issue, and whether the proposed party should be joined as co-defendant. Applying Order 1 Rule 15 and the Supreme Court's guidelines in the Muruatetu case on joinder of interested parties, E.C. Cherono J found that the applicants had not demonstrated a causal link between the plaintiff's claim and the proposed party, had not disclosed the estate issues they wanted clarified, and had not established any identifiable, proximate interest of the proposed party in the existing cause of action. The application was dismissed with costs on 20th September 2019.

Key legal issues

#
01

Requirements for issuance of a third party notice under Order 1 Rule 15 CPR

Holding

The applicants failed to show that the issues between the defendant and the proposed third party are substantially the same as those between plaintiff and defendant; no causal link was demonstrated.

Reasoning

Order 1 Rule 15 requires that the defendant claim contribution, indemnity, or that a question relating to the subject matter be substantially the same as between plaintiff and defendant. The applicants only stated it would be prudent to enjoin the proposed third party to clarify issues regarding the Estate of Rubui Kabagi without disclosing those issues, so the threshold for the orders sought was not satisfied.

p. 2
02

Test for joinder of parties under Order 1 CPR

Holding

Joinder requires a common question of law or fact; it may be refused where it causes practical problems, is unnecessary, or occasions unnecessary delay or costs.

Reasoning

The court restated the law that joinder should be permitted for parties with a right to relief arising out of the same act or transaction, and that a court may add a necessary party even suo motu. However, applying the Supreme Court's elements in Muruatetu, the applicants did not identify any proximate, clearly identifiable interest of the proposed party in the existing cause of action, so joinder was declined.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The determining factor for joinder of parties is that an applicant must establish a common question of fact or law between the existing and intended parties
  • To join a third party, the subject matter and original cause of action between the third party and the defendant must be the same as between plaintiff and defendant

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application dated 19th November 2015 is dismissed with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rules 3, 11, 14 and 15
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A and 3A

Cases cited (1)

  • Francis Kariuki Muruatetu Ltd & another Vs Republic & 5 others
    Petition No. 15/2016 of (2016) e K.L.R
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 1 Rules 3, 11 & 14 and Sections 1A & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Lucy Wambui Muriithi & 2 others v Dorcase Muthoni Karani & 5 others [2019] KEELC 1579 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Notice of Motion dated 19th November 2015 (ELC, Kerugoya). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/1579/eng@2019-09-20

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