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

Southcote Limited v Andrew Smith & 15 others [2019] KEHC 12344 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 12344 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
12344
Citation
[2019] KEHC 12344 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureAppeal from a previous ruling on a party/party bill of costs and an application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation.CoramM. KASANGO
Holding

The plaintiff's application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation is dismissed with costs.

Facts

The plaintiff filed a notice of discontinuous withdrawing the case against all defendants. The defendants filed a party/party bill of costs for costs awarded to them, which was taxed by the taxing master. The plaintiff then filed an application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation.

Issues

  1. The plaintiff's application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation was granted by the court.
  2. The plaintiff's application to stay execution pending the hearing and determination of the application dated 14th August 2019 was dismissed with costs.

Reasoning

The plaintiff's application is misconceived and unmerited because it was determined on 26th September 2019, and the plaintiff seeks to stay execution pending the hearing and determination of the application dated 14th August 2019.

Outcome

The plaintiff's application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's application for enlargement of time for filing Notice of objection to the taxation is dismissed with costs.
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