REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MALINDI HCCC NO. 19 OF 2009 ANDREW KABAILA …...............................PLAINTIFF VERSUS CAROL BAHATI KAHINDI …....................DEFENDANT RULING 1. As framed, the plaintiff's plaint does not seem to disclose any cause of action known to Kenyan law. When the counsel for the plaintiff was asked to submit on the issue he stated that the case is based on “unjust enrichment” while admitting that this matter really emanates from a matrimonial dispute between the parties. Mr. Shujaa for the Defendant correctly argued that there is a specific procedure for dealing with matrimonial disputes or distribution of property acquired during a marriage. 2. In addition, he stated that no cause of action is disclosed in the plaint. To this end he referred to the case of J. K. vs A.K. HCCC NO. 1433 of 1999 whose facts are similar to the present case. In that case, the plaint was struck out for similar reasons, among others. I am not satisfied that the plaintiff has demonstrated any salvageable cause of action known to Kenyan law in respect of this suit and I order the plaint struck out with costs. Delivered and signed at Malindi this 3rd day of April, 2013 in the presence of Mr. Shujaa for defendant, plaintiff absent. Court clerk - Evans C. W. Meoli JUDGE 3th April, 2013
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.