Mohamed v Ocean View Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E057 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 864 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to strike out an amended pleading, confirming courts freely allow amendments before trial when no real prejudice results.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an Amended Plaint filed without leave after close of pleadings should be struck out
The Motion was dismissed; the amendments caused no prejudice as trial had not commenced and the amendments related to the same facts
The Court traced its discretionary power to amend under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and the striking-out jurisdiction under Order 2 Rule 15(1). It noted the 3rd Defendant did not allege the pleading disclosed no cause of action or was scandalous or vexatious, only that leave was not obtained. Given trial had not commenced and the facts were the same as originally pleaded, no prejudice warranting striking out was established.
Whether the power to strike out pleadings should be exercised sparingly
Yes; striking out is discretionary and permissive, to be used sparingly and only where a pleading is clearly untenable
Relying on Blue Shield Insurance Co Ltd v Joseph Mboya Oguttu, which adopted D.T. Dobie & Company (Kenya) Ltd v Muchina and Cail Zeiss Stiftung v Ranjuer & Keeler Ltd, the Court held the striking-out power is not mandatory but permissive and discretionary, must be exercised on consideration of all facts without embarking on the merits, and should be used very sparingly.
Legal principles established
#- The Court has a wide discretion to allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings where doing so will aid determination of the real issues between the parties
- Amendments should be freely allowed if they will not cause prejudice or injustice not compensable by costs or terms
- The power to strike out pleadings is discretionary, not mandatory, and must be used sparingly and only where the pleading is clearly untenable
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 4th July 2025 is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 2 Rule 15(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21; Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules; Section 19(2) of the Environment and Land Court Act (invoked by the applicant)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mohamed v Ocean View Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E057 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 864 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (suit identified only by the Plaint dated 24th May 2022 and Amended Plaint dated 15th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/864/eng@2026-02-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.