Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment (Eldoret ELC suit, Notice of Motion dated 22 October 2020)· [2021] KEELC 575 (KLR)

Jambo Holdings Limited v Double Clean Limited & 6 others [2021] KEELC 575 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
18 November 2021
EOE.O. OBAGA
612 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a suit against a defendant no relief was sought against, confirming unnecessary parties can be removed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Eldoret (E.O. Obaga, J) on a Notice of Motion dated 22 October 2020 by the 6th Defendant seeking to have the suit against it struck out on the ground that the plaint discloses no reasonable cause of action against it, that no relief is sought against it, and that it is an unnecessary party. The plaintiff did not oppose the application; only the 1st to 5th Defendants opposed it, arguing that a party need not have relief sought against it to remain a defendant, that the 6th Defendant should explain how the suit property was charged to it despite their title, and that the application was brought in bad faith five years after filing. The parties disposed of the application by written submissions. The court framed a single issue: whether the plaint discloses a reasonable cause of action against the Applicant. Relying on Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and agreeing with Justice Eboso's decision in Alumark Investments Limited v Tom Otieno Onyango & 4 Others, the court held that no relief was sought against the 6th Defendant and that the plaintiff, having sued it, conceded the point. Any explanation about the charge could be given through the Applicant's representative called as a witness. The court therefore allowed the application, struck out the suit against the 6th Defendant, and awarded costs to it.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the plaint discloses a reasonable cause of action against the 6th Defendant

Holding

It does not; no relief is sought against the 6th Defendant and the plaintiff concedes this, so the suit against it is struck out.

Reasoning

The court applied Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules on joinder of defendants, noting that joinder is only proper where a right to relief arises out of the same act or transaction. Since no relief was sought against the Applicant and the plaintiff (who sued it) was not opposed to its removal, the Applicant is an unnecessary party. Any explanation about the charge over the suit property can be obtained by calling the Applicant's representative as a witness rather than retaining it as a party. The court agreed with Justice Eboso's decision in Alumark Investments Limited.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A party against whom no relief is sought, and whom the plaintiff does not wish to keep as a defendant, need not remain a party; its representative can instead be called as a witness.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The 6th Defendant's application is allowed
  2. 2.The suit against the 6th Defendant is struck out
  3. 3.Costs of the application to the 6th Defendant/Applicant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 3

Cases cited (1)

  • Alumark Investments Limited Vs Tom Otieno Onyango & 4 Others
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Civil Procedure Act)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Jambo Holdings Limited v Double Clean Limited & 6 others [2021] KEELC 575 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment (Eldoret ELC suit, Notice of Motion dated 22 October 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/575/eng@2021-11-18

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