Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
MagistrateStruck OutNot stated in the judgment· [2024] KEMC 147 (KLR)

Njenga (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Faith Njeri Njogu – Deceased) v Ototo & another (Civil Suit E014 of 2023) [2024] KEMC 147 (KLR)

Senior Principal Magistrate's Court at Nakuru
10 September 2024
1,106 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court struck out a substitution application because the deceased's suit had abated and revival had to be sought first, in the same application.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
By a Notice of Motion dated 10 July 2024 brought under Order 24 Rules 1 and 2, Order 8 Rule 3 and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Rules, Lucy Njeri Ngugi, holder of letters of administration ad litem for the estate of the deceased plaintiff Michael Njogu Njenga, sought to be substituted as plaintiff in the suit. The application, supported by the affidavit of counsel Naftaly Rubua Ngure, argued that the suit was straightforward and that no prejudice would be suffered by the defendants if the suit were revived, heard and determined on merit. It was unopposed. The court, however, held that an unopposed application is not granted as a matter of course, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Gideon S. Konchellah v Julius L. Sunkuli. Examining Order 24, the court noted that the deceased plaintiff died on 8 May 2023 and that more than one year had lapsed by the time the application was filed, so the suit had abated. Under Order 24 Rule 7(2), an abated suit must first be revived on proof of sufficient cause before any substitution can be effected; following Mbaya Nzulwa v Kenya Power & Lighting Co. Ltd, revival and substitution ought to have been sought in the same application. An order of substitution without revival would be a nullity in law. The court accordingly found the application unmerited, struck it out with costs, and directed that a certified copy of the ruling be supplied to counsel upon payment of the requisite fee.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether substitution could be granted where the suit had already abated under Order 24 Rule 3(2)

Holding

No - the suit abated one year after the plaintiff's death and the applicant should first have sought revival under Order 24 Rule 7(2) before seeking substitution

Reasoning

The deceased plaintiff died on 8 May 2023 and the substitution application was made on 10 July 2024, after the one-year period. Under Order 24 Rule 7(2) an abated suit may be revived on proof of sufficient cause. Following Mbaya Nzulwa v Kenya Power & Lighting Co. Ltd, the correct course was to seek revival and substitution in the same application. Substitution without revival would be a nullity, so the application lacked merit.

p. 2
02

Whether an unopposed application must be allowed as a matter of course

Holding

No - even unopposed applications must satisfy the court on merit

Reasoning

Relying on Gideon S. Konchellah v Julius L. Sunkuli, the court held it retains a duty to examine the substance of an unopposed application. It is not automatic that ex parte or unopposed applications will be granted; the court must be satisfied that the application is prima facie meritorious before granting the prayers sought.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • An unopposed application is not automatically granted; the court must still satisfy itself that it is meritorious
  • An abated suit must first be revived before substitution of a party can be effected; the proper course is to seek revival and substitution in the same application

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Application for substitution is struck out with costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 24 Rules 1 and 2
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 24 Rule 3
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 24 Rule 7
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 8 Rule 3
  • Civil Procedure RulesSection 3A

Cases cited (2)

  • Gideon S. Konchellah v Julius L. Sunkuli And 2 Others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Mbaya Nzulwa v Kenya Power & Lighting Co. Ltd
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 24 Rules 1 and 2, Order 8 Rule 3 and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Njenga (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Faith Njeri Njogu – Deceased) v Ototo & another (Civil Suit E014 of 2023) [2024] KEMC 147 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2024/147/eng@2024-09-10

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