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

Prophetic Church Ministries of East Africa (Suing through its registered Chairman) Peter Lemmo Amugune v Africa Kenya Sabcrynnsk of Soi (Being sued through its registered Chairman) Abraham Shikuku & 3 others [2019] KEHC 742 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 742 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
742
Citation
[2019] KEHC 742 (KLR)
Decided
21 November 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPosturePreliminary objection filed by the 2nd defendant challenging the legal validity of an amended petitionCoramC. W. GITHUA
Holding

The preliminary objection is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the plaintiff.

Facts

The plaintiff, Prophetic Church Ministries of East Africa, filed a suit against the defendants, Africa Kenya Sabcrynnsk of Soi, Ronald Ambulwa, Jared Amusava, and African Kenya White Star Sabcrynsk of Soi, alleging unfair competition. The defendants filed a preliminary objection claiming the suit was res judicata and lacked jurisdiction.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff's suit is res judicata.
  2. If the answer to issue No. 1 is in the negative, whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

Reasoning

The court found that the plaintiff's suit was not res judicata as the suit filed in the magistrate's court was not heard on merit but was struck out due to lack of jurisdiction. The court also dismissed the claim that the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the suit based on the Trade Marks Act.

Outcome

The preliminary objection is dismissed.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection dismissed with costs to the plaintiff.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Trade Marks Act
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