Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission v Sampadoria Investments Limited & 3 others; National Water Harvesting and Storage Authority & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Case E023 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 294 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Striking out/dismissal of suit
Refused; striking out is drastic and discretionary
Applying Yaya Towers and Blue Shield, the court held that a claimant is entitled to pursue a claim however implausible unless it is demonstrably bound to fail or abusive. Whether the EACC suit disclosed a cause required examining evidence, a merits inquiry reserved for trial. The limitation argument under Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act could not be resolved summarily.
Consolidation of suits
Granted; the two suits concern the same property and same parties
Guided by Section 81(2)(h) of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 11 Rule 3 and authorities including Prem Lala Nahata, Law Society of Kenya and Municipal Council of Mombasa, the court found common questions of law and fact, the same suit property (L.R No. MN/I/10401), likely identical documents and witnesses, and no prejudice since neither suit had been heard. The EACC suit, filed first, was designated lead file.
Cross-examination of process server on Affidavit of Service
Granted; conflicting affidavit evidence justified examination of the process server
Under Order 5 Rule 16 and Order 19 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has discretion to examine a serving officer where service is disputed. Applying Republic v KRA ex-parte Althaus, the court found a good reason existed given conflicting affidavits on whether the Applicant was served, and cross-examination was warranted.
Costs of the application
No orders as to costs
While costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the court reserved its discretion and declined to award costs, presumably because the application succeeded only in part.
Legal principles established
#- The power to strike out a pleading should be used very sparingly and only where the pleading is clearly untenable
- Consolidation is to facilitate efficient and expeditious disposal and must not confer undue advantage on the party seeking it
- Cross-examination of a deponent on affidavit evidence is discretionary, not a right, and must be justified on a proper foundation
- Costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, though the court retains discretion
Court orders
#- 1.Notice of Motion dated 28th June, 2024 partially allowed, strictly in respect to prayers 3 and 5
- 2.Consolidation of Mombasa ELC No. E023 of 2024 (Sampadoria Investments Limited v National Water Harvesting and Storage Authority & 4 Others) and ELC Case No. E023 OF 2023 (Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission v Sampadoria Investments Limited & Others)
- 3.ELC Case No. E023 OF 2023, being the suit filed first, designated the lead file
- 4.Patrick Chirongo, the Plaintiff's legal clerk, summoned to appear before the Court on 3rd February, 2025 for cross-examination on the contents of his Affidavit of Service sworn on 7th December 2023
- 5.No orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3A and 81(2)(h) of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 21; Order 11 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010; Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission v Sampadoria Investments Limited & 3 others; National Water Harvesting and Storage Authority & 2 others (Interested Parties) (Environment & Land Case E023 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 294 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELC Case No. E023 OF 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/294/eng@2025-01-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.