Ngugi v Karanja t/a Starshine Klub Q West Keg Bar Starshine Klub Q West & 3 others (Environment and Planning Civil Case 2 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 3523 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court conditionally reinstated a bar owner into a nuisance case, but only after regulators and Safaricom reveal who really runs the club.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether sufficient cause existed to set aside the ex parte orders of 21st November 2023
The court held it has discretion to set aside ex parte orders even where service was proper; the Applicant's non-participation deprived him of the chance to contest the orders, so conditional relief was warranted
The Applicant did not deny that the email used in the affidavit of service belonged to his advocate, so service was not impugned. Nevertheless the court exercised its discretion under Order 51 rule 15, relying on PMM v JNW and Philip Ongom v Catherine Nyero Owota, because the claim turned on the 1st Defendant's alleged activities and the Applicant had no opportunity to oppose. The court therefore granted the disclosure prayers to establish the connection before reinstating the party.
Whether the striking-out order should be varied immediately
Setting aside was made conditional on the outcome of the disclosure orders
The court reasoned that prayers 3 and 4 were aimed at obtaining evidence linking Samuel Mbugua Karanja to the club alleged to cause nuisance. Until that link is affirmed by the registration authority and Safaricom records, reinstating the party would be premature. Prayer 2 would stand allowed only if the documents are in the 1st Defendant's name; otherwise it stands dismissed.
Legal principles established
#- In setting aside ex parte orders, the court must be satisfied either that the respondent was not properly served or that absence was due to sufficient cause
- The court retains discretion to set aside an ex parte order even where service was proper, upon sufficient cause being shown
Court orders
#- 1.Prayers 3 and 4 of the motion allowed - the 2nd Defendant to provide registration and ownership details of Starshine Klub Q.West Keg Bar and Safaricom Plc to provide identification documents/forms used to register till number 8469356, within 14 days after service of the order
- 2.Prayer 2 (setting aside the order striking out Samuel Mbugua Karanja) stands allowed only if the documents disclosed are in the name of the 1st Defendant; if not, prayer 2 stands dismissed
- 3.Plaintiff/Applicant to meet the respective costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Not expressly invoked; motion brought under Order 51 rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking review/setting aside of ex parte orders
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ngugi v Karanja t/a Starshine Klub Q West Keg Bar Starshine Klub Q West & 3 others (Environment and Planning Civil Case 2 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 3523 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated on the face of the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/3523/eng@2025-03-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.