Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 13th September 2018 (suit number not stated)· [2019] KEELC 4918 (KLR)

Solian Investments Limited v KSC Internatinal Limited In Receivership (formerly Known as Kundan Singh Construction Limited & 5 others [2019] KEELC 4918 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
24 January 2019
853 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

#

Kenya's High Court admitted a late-filed Defence but ordered the late party to pay Kshs 50,000 throw away costs within 14 days or lose it.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The 1st Defendant, KSC International Ltd, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 13th September 2018 seeking admission of an Amended Defence filed on 3rd September 2018 out of time and without leave. The Defendant explained that it had been served with the Further Amended Plaint in 2016 but, owing to an ongoing dispute between receivers and its directors in Nairobi HCCC No. 446 of 2015, inadvertently failed to file the Amended Defence in time, filing it only after seeking the Plaintiff's indulgence on 30th August 2018. The Plaintiff opposed the application on the grounds of gross delay of nearly two years, breach of a consent order of 24th August 2016, absence of leave, abuse of process, laches, and prejudice caused by filing the application on the hearing date. The court observed that the claim being a land claim, neither Order 10 Rule 4 (liquidated claims) nor Order 10 Rule 6 (general damages) applied, so no interlocutory judgment had been entered despite the Defendant's prolonged default. Holding that striking out the late Amended Defence would be too draconian where the matter had yet to be heard, the court admitted the Defence but found the Plaintiff genuinely prejudiced, having prepared for the hearing fixed for 25th September 2018. The court accordingly admitted the Amended Defence on condition that the Defendant pay throw away costs of Kshs 50,000/- within 14 days, failing which the Defence would stand struck out. Judgment delivered at Malindi on 24th January 2019 by J.O. Olola, J.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether a Defence filed out of time and without leave should be admitted

Holding

Admitted, subject to payment of throw away costs, in the interest of a fair hearing

Reasoning

The suit is a land claim to which the default judgment rules do not apply. Although the 1st Defendant gave only a weak explanation for the delay, the matter had not yet been heard, and the court held that depriving it of the right to plead would be unduly harsh. However, the Plaintiff, having fixed the matter for hearing while the Defendant had not filed pleadings, suffered real inconvenience, which is compensated through throw away costs with a default sanction of striking out.

p. 2
02

Whether the Plaintiff suffered prejudice

Holding

Yes; the Plaintiff had prepared for the hearing fixed for 25th September 2018 and was inconvenienced

Reasoning

The Plaintiff fixed the hearing date at a time when the 1st Defendant had not filed pleadings. Filing of the Amended Defence days before the hearing date meant the Plaintiff had prepared for a hearing that could not proceed. The court found the claim of no prejudice untenable and addressed the prejudice through throw away costs.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Striking out a late-filed pleading is a draconian remedy where the suit has yet to be heard and each party should be afforded an opportunity to plead its case

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Amended Defence filed on 3rd September 2018 is admitted
  2. 2.The 1st Defendant to pay throw away costs of Kshs 50,000/- to the Plaintiff within 14 days
  3. 3.If the costs are not paid within the prescribed time, the Amended Defence will stand struck out

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 10 Rule 4; Order 10 Rule 6
Jurisdiction invoked
Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to regulate its own procedure (Civil Procedure Rules, Order 10 and pleadings provisions); no specific provision cited

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Solian Investments Limited v KSC Internatinal Limited In Receivership (formerly Known as Kundan Singh Construction Limited & 5 others [2019] KEELC 4918 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Notice of Motion dated 13th September 2018 (suit number not stated). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4918/eng@2019-01-24

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