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

B W K v E K [2008] KEHC 3199 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 3199 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
3199
Citation
[2008] KEHC 3199 (KLR)
Decided
22 February 2008
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from an original trial outcomeCoramAaron G. Ringera, L. Njagi
Holding

The court grants the plaintiff leave to further amend the plaint, but strikes out the verifying affidavit accompanying the further amended plaint.

Facts

The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants raising complaints of sexual harassment, assault, and battery. The plaintiff sought to further amend the plaint to include more particulars of the sexual harassment.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to further amend the plaint
  2. Whether the defendants will suffer prejudice from the further amendment

Reasoning

The court allows the amendment as it is not too late and no injustice will be caused. The defendants will not suffer prejudice as they can respond to the new items if they so wish.

Outcome

The plaintiff is granted leave to further amend the plaint, and the defendants are ordered to amend their defences if they so wish.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is granted leave to further amend the plaint
  • The verifying affidavit is struck out
  • The defendants are ordered to amend their defences if they so wish
  • The plaintiff is to file another copy of the further amended plaint within 14 days
  • The defendants are to be served with the further amended plaint within 14 days
  • The defendants are ordered to pay the costs of the application

Remedies

  • Leave to further amend the plaint

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (3)
  • NBI HCCC NO. 1811 of 1999 BLUE SHIELD INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS RICHARD MBONDO
  • NBI HCCC NO. 68 of 2003
  • J.P. MACHARIA VERSUS WACHIRA WAIRURU AND ANOTHER
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case