SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited v X-Treme Electronics Ltd (Civil Appeal 70 of 2019) [2025] KECA 507 (KLR) (21 March 2025) (Judgment)

[2025] KECA 507 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
507
Citation
[2025] KECA 507 (KLR)
Decided
21 March 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the High Court Commercial DivisionCoramS. GATEMBU KAIRU, F. TUIYOTT, L. ACHODE
Holding

We dismiss the appeal with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The respondent filed a plaint against the appellant for Kshs.12,660,128.60 for contractual works completed under the supervision of the appellant's agent, Synchro-consult Associates Limited. The appellant denied the content of the plaint and denied the existence of a principal-agent relationship.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned judge erred in finding that the respondent's application to strike out the defence was opposed through written submissions without a reply affidavit.
  2. Whether the learned judge erred in not considering the appellant's replying affidavit.
  3. Whether the learned judge erred in determining the respondent's application to strike out the defence before considering the appellant's application to amend the defence.
  4. Whether the learned judge erred in finding that the plainti concluded the work to the satisfaction of the defendant agent.
  5. Whether the learned judge erred in finding that the statement of defence did not raise any triable issue to the plainti's claim.
  6. Whether the learned judge erred in finding that the appellant's application to amend the defence was an abuse of the court process.
  7. Whether the learned judge erred in finding that the respondent's application seeking leave to amend the defence was filed in response to the plainti's application to strike out the statement of defence.

Reasoning

The learned judge dismissed the appellant's application to amend the defence and strike out the defence. The court found that the appellant's application was intended to stop the respondent's application to strike out the defence or to delay the conclusion of the suit. The court also found that the learned judge merely stated a fact that it was evident on the face of the pleadings that the statement of defence did not raise triable issues to the respondent's case.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • DT Dobie & Company (Kenya) Ltd vs Muchina & Aother (1982) KLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case