Automated Summary
Key Facts
The court ruled on a preliminary objection by the 3rd defendant (Kenya Railways Corporation) in Alcop Limited v Mako Ali & 2 others [2017] eKLR. The objection argued the current suit duplicated a pending case (ELC 99 of 2012) involving the same subject matter but with two additional parties. The judge found the prayers in both suits were 'copy paste' and determined the plaintiff's failure to amend the earlier suit constituted an abuse of court process. The current proceedings were struck out with costs to the 3rd defendant under Section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Issues
The primary legal issue centered on the 3rd defendant's preliminary objection that the plaintiff's suit violated section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act by duplicating a pending case. The court ruled the suit was an abuse of process, noting identical prayers and the failure to include all necessary parties in the earlier filing. Despite section 6 not explicitly allowing for striking out, the court found the later suit invalid due to procedural inefficiency and constitutional obligations under article 159.
Holdings
The court found that the plaintiff's suit was an abuse of the court process under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it duplicated a pending case (ELC case no. 99 of 2012) with identical prayers. The suit was struck out with costs awarded to the 3rd defendant, Kenya Railways Corporation.
Remedies
The suit was struck out with costs to the 3rd defendant due to it being an abuse of the court process by filing a similar suit in violation of section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Legal Principles
The court ruled that the plaintiff's second suit was an abuse of the judicial process under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it duplicated the subject matter and parties of a pending earlier case. The decision emphasized the principle of res judicata to prevent redundant litigation and preserve judicial efficiency, aligning with the Civil Procedure Act's overriding objectives.
Precedent Name
- HCC Case No. 9 of 2012
- ELC Case No. 99 of 2012
Cited Statute
- Constitution of Kenya
- Civil Procedure Act
Judge Name
A. Omollo
Passage Text
- By filing a similar suit other than breaching the provisions of section 6 of Civil Procedure Act, the plaintiff has also contravened the overriding objectives of the Civil Procedure Act by clogging the court system thus not using available resources efficiently. For this reason, I find this later suit an abuse of the court process and hereby strike it out with costs to the 3rd defendant.
- I have looked at the prayers sought in this suit ad find them to be similar word for word to the prayers 4. sought in the earlier suit no. HCC 9 of2012. The objection is thus merited as the matters in issue here is similar to the matters in issue in the earlier suit. The plaintiff argues that the orders this court can grant is to either consolidate the two suits or stay one as section 6 of the Act does not provide for striking out of the suit. I entirely agree with Mr. Koech on this but you can only make an order for consolidation or stay if such an order would serve a purpose.