Sagal Travel Agency Limited v Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, Commercial & Tax Division
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Justice Maureen A. Odero
Judgment Date
September 18, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Sagal Travel Agency Limited v Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited [2020] eKLR, highlighting key legal principles and the court's decision.


Case Brief: Sagal Travel Agency Limited v Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Sagal Travel Agency Limited v. Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited
- Case Number: Civil Suit No. 168 of 2015
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, Commercial & Tax Division
- Date Delivered: 18th September 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Justice Maureen A. Odero
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues before the court included whether Sagal Travel Agency Limited should be granted leave to amend its plaint and further witness statement, and whether the amendments would prejudice the defendant, Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited.

3. Facts of the Case:
Sagal Travel Agency Limited (the Plaintiff) initiated a civil suit against Saham Assurance Company Kenya Limited (the Defendant) on 1st April 2015, seeking damages for loss of business value amounting to Kshs. 964,583,776.80. The case was certified ready for hearing, with the trial set to commence on 6th February 2019. However, on that date, the Plaintiff identified a computational error in the amount claimed, prompting the need to amend the plaint. The Defendant opposed the application, citing considerable delay and potential prejudice to its counterclaim.

4. Procedural History:
The Plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion application on 29th July 2019, seeking leave to amend its plaint and further witness statement. This application was supported by an affidavit from Abdiqand Ali, a director of the Plaintiff. The Defendant responded with grounds of opposition, arguing that the application was delayed, would prejudice their counterclaim, and was an abuse of court process. The matter was subsequently canvassed through written submissions from both parties, with the Plaintiff submitting on 4th December 2019 and the Defendant on 2nd March 2020.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, which allows parties to amend pleadings at any stage of proceedings, provided it does not cause injustice to the opposing party.
- Case Law: The court referenced several precedents, including *Kassam v. Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Limited* [2002] I KLR, which set out factors for allowing amendments, and *Eastern Bakery v. Castelino* [1958] E.A., which emphasized that amendments should be freely allowed before trial if they do not cause injustice. The *Central Kenya Ltd v. Trust Bank Ltd & 5 Others* case reiterated that mere delay is not sufficient to deny amendments unless it causes undue prejudice.
- Application: The court found that the Plaintiff's application to amend was necessary for a just determination of the case. Despite the delay, the court noted that the trial had not commenced, and the Defendant would not suffer prejudice as they also had the right to amend their pleadings. The court concluded that allowing the amendments would facilitate the judicial process rather than hinder it.

6. Conclusion:
The court granted the Plaintiff's application for leave to amend its plaint and further witness statement, emphasizing the importance of allowing amendments for the just resolution of disputes. The court ordered the Plaintiff to pay the Defendant Kshs. 30,000 in getting up costs due to the timing of the application.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions reported in this case.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled in favor of Sagal Travel Agency Limited, allowing the amendment of its plaint and further witness statement, despite the delay. This decision underscores the court's inclination to favor procedural flexibility and the pursuit of justice over rigid adherence to timelines, highlighting the importance of ensuring that all relevant claims are considered in the resolution of disputes.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Sagal-Travel-Agency-Limited-v-Saham-Assurance-Company-Kenya-Limited-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1289_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries