Serve in Love Trust Africa v Abraham Kiptarus Kiptoo & 2 others; Ambrose Kiprop & 2 others (3rd Parties/Respondents) [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Dr. M. A. Odeny
Judgment Date
September 22, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2
Explore the 2020 eKLR case summary of Serve in Love Trust Africa v Abraham Kiptarus Kiptoo & 2 others, focusing on significant legal implications and outcomes involving Ambrose Kiprop and others as respondents.

Case Brief: Serve in Love Trust Africa v Abraham Kiptarus Kiptoo & 2 others; Ambrose Kiprop & 2 others (3rd Parties/Respondents) [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Serve in Love Trust Africa v. Abraham Kiptarus Kiptoo & 2 Others
- Case Number: ELC No. 21 of 2017
- Court: Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- Date Delivered: September 22, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Dr. M. A. Odeny
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues for resolution in this case are whether the plaintiff's suit should be struck out due to the lack of reasonable cause of action, and whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of the court process.

3. Facts of the Case:
The plaintiff, Serve in Love Trust Africa, initiated a suit against the defendants, Abraham Kiptarus Kiptoo and two others, alongside third parties Ambrose Kiprop and two others. The case arose from a dispute regarding the trusteeship of the SILA Trust, which owned the property in question (Kipsinende/Kipsinende Block 3). A previous ruling by the High Court determined the bona fide trustees of the SILA Trust, which has direct implications for the current proceedings. The defendants argued that the individuals who filed the suit on behalf of the plaintiff were no longer authorized to do so, rendering the suit an abuse of the court process.

4. Procedural History:
The defendants filed an application on December 13, 2019, seeking to have the plaintiff's suit struck out, claiming it disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was an abuse of the court process. The defendants contended that the trusteeship of the individuals who filed the suit had been declared illegal, and thus they lacked the capacity to bring the case. The plaintiff's counsel argued that the High Court's determination regarding trusteeship was still under appeal, and therefore, the case should not be dismissed at this stage. The court ultimately decided to stay the proceedings for 30 days pending the outcome of the appeal.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Order 2 Rule 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which grants the court the jurisdiction to strike out pleadings that are deemed scandalous, frivolous, or an abuse of the court process.
- Case Law: The court referenced the case of *John Nahashon Mwangi v. Kenya Finance Bank Limited (in Liquidation)* [2015] eKLR, which emphasized the principles of justice enshrined in the Constitution, particularly the right to be heard and the need to serve substantive justice.
- Application: The court analyzed the implications of the High Court's previous ruling regarding the trusteeship of the SILA Trust. It noted that if the pending appeal were to succeed, the original trustees' authority could be reinstated, thus reviving the cause of action in this suit. The court expressed that striking out a suit is a drastic measure and should be avoided unless absolutely necessary, especially when there is a pending appeal that may affect the case.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the defendants' application to strike out the plaintiff's suit, finding it lacked merit. The court ruled that the proceedings should be stayed for 30 days to await the outcome of the related appeal, emphasizing the importance of allowing the judicial process to unfold without prematurely dismissing the case.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions recorded in this ruling.

8. Summary:
The Environment and Land Court at Eldoret ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Serve in Love Trust Africa, by dismissing the defendants' application to strike out the suit. The decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring that parties have the opportunity to pursue their claims, particularly in light of pending appeals that may impact the case's outcome. This ruling highlights the balance courts must strike between preventing abuse of the court process and ensuring access to justice.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Serve-in-Love-Trust-Africa-v-Abraham-Kiptarus-Kiptoo--2-others-Ambrose-Kiprop--2-others-3rd-Parties-Respondents-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1481_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries