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

Elijah Kinyua Ng’ang’a & 3 others v Gitu Wa Kahengeri & 3 others [2015] KEHC 7972 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 7972 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
7972
Citation
[2015] KEHC 7972 (KLR)
Decided
5 November 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a preliminary objectionCoramA.MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
Holding

The preliminary objection should only extend to the 4th defendant. The 1st to 3rd defendants are subjects and individuals sued in their personal capacity, and an injunction can be issued against them. The suit should be heard on its merits and the court should determine whether to deny the relief or return a persuasive verdict through a declaratory order.

Facts

The plaintiffs (Elijah Kinyua Ng’ang’a, Mwai Wa Muthigi, Waveru Mugo, and Muiruri Njuguna) filed a suit against the defendants (Gitu Wa Kahengeri, Jacob Nyaga, Mau Mau War Veterans Association, and the Registrar of Societies) seeking an injunction. The 4th defendant (Registrar of Societies) raised a preliminary objection based on the Government Proceedings Act (Cap 40).

Issues

  1. Whether the preliminary objection raised by the 4th defendant should be allowed.
  2. Whether the suit should be heard on its merits or dismissed based on the preliminary objection.

Reasoning

The preliminary objection did not dispose of the suit on the basis of Section 16 in a summary manner. The court should hear the matter on its merits.

Outcome

The suit should be heard on its merits.

Orders

  • No order as to costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Government Proceedings Act (Cap 40)
Cases cited (1)
  • Mukisa Biscuits Manufacturing Co. Ltd –v- Westend Distributors Ltd [1969] EA 696
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