Paragon Electronics Limited v Velos Enterprises Limited [2021] KEELC 3016 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether additional evidence could be introduced after pretrial and before hearing
The application was refused because the affidavit was within the Plaintiff's knowledge when it filed its further list of documents on 24/2/2020 and no explanation was given for the delay
The court examined the plaint and noted that the claim for loss of rent was based on a valuation report by Topmark Valuers, not on rental income admitted in the consolidated suits. The affidavit sought to be introduced was a party to those proceedings and thus within the Plaintiff's knowledge at the time of filing its further list of documents. Given the protracted dispute, the Plaintiff should have identified its documents earlier, and no explanation was offered for introducing the document after pretrial.
Whether the witness could testify via video link on grounds of the Covid-19 pandemic
The court declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the Plaintiff on the video-link application
The court found the application overtaken by events because the hearing of 30/9/2020 did not proceed, and noted the unsettled pandemic situation including the third wave and developing vaccines, meaning the witness could in due course travel to Kenya. Further, the Defendant's averment that a warrant of arrest was outstanding against Mr. Gulbahar was not controverted, and the Plaintiff did not explain when the witness left the country or when he was expected to return before the pandemic.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking relief must be candid with the court; lack of candour disentitles a party from the relief sought
- A plaintiff is expected to know at the time of filing suit, and when filing further lists of documents, which documents it will rely on to prove its claim
Court orders
#- 1.The court declines to grant the orders sought in the application dated 21/9/2020
- 2.The Defendant is awarded the costs of the application dated 21/9/2020
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court over the consolidated suits; application under the Civil Procedure Act (overriding objective, Section 1B) and Section 63A(1) of the Evidence Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Paragon Electronics Limited v Velos Enterprises Limited [2021] KEELC 3016 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). HCCC consolidated matters arising from HCCC No. 289 of 2009 and HCCC No. 285 of 2010 (suit filed 25/11/2015). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/3016/eng@2021-04-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.