Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited v Sanlam General Insurance Limited & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court

High Court of Kenya at Mombasa

Category

Civil

Judge(s)

Hon. P.J.O. Otieno

Judgment Date

October 21, 2020

Country

Kenya

Document Type

PDF

Number of Pages

Case Summary Full Judgment

Case Brief: Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited v Sanlam General Insurance Limited & another [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited v. Sanlam General Insurance Limited & Royal Hisham Kenya Limited
- Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 32 of 2019
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Mombasa
- Date Delivered: October 21, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. P.J.O. Otieno
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The primary legal questions presented in this case involve determining the allocation of costs associated with the appeal, specifically whether the 2nd Respondent, Royal Hisham Kenya Limited, should be responsible for any part of the costs and if the court has the authority to clarify the costs order given the previous rulings.

3. Facts of the Case:
The appellant, Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited, initiated an appeal against the ruling of the Chief Magistrate’s Court of Kenya at Mombasa, which was delivered on February 4, 2019. The respondents included Sanlam General Insurance Limited as the 1st Respondent and Royal Hisham Kenya Limited as the 2nd Respondent. The 2nd Respondent sought clarification on the costs of the appeal, arguing that they were brought into the appeal without consent and had supported the dismissal of the suit from the beginning. The 1st Respondent opposed the application, claiming that the court was functus officio regarding costs.

4. Procedural History:
The appeal progressed through the Chief Magistrate’s Court, where the initial ruling was made. The 2nd Respondent filed a Notice of Motion on June 16, 2020, seeking clarification on the costs order. The 1st Respondent contested the application on grounds of the court's authority and the procedural validity of the application. The matter was heard despite the absence of representation from the 1st Respondent during the hearing.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court referenced Section 26 of the Civil Procedure Act, which grants discretion to the court regarding the allocation of costs in litigation. It stipulates that costs typically follow the event unless otherwise ordered for good reason.
- Case Law: The ruling did not explicitly cite prior case law; however, it implicitly relied on established principles regarding the discretion of courts in awarding costs and the definition of a successful party in litigation.
- Application: The court determined that the 2nd Respondent, as a passive respondent who did not actively participate in the appeal, could not be deemed to have succeeded or failed in the litigation. Therefore, the court clarified that the 2nd Respondent would bear its own costs, while the 1st Respondent would be responsible for the costs incurred by the appellant.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled that the 2nd Respondent would bear its own costs, and the 1st Respondent would cover the costs incurred by the appellant. This decision clarified the allocation of costs without revisiting the substantive issues of the original appeal.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling, as the decision was made by a single judge, Hon. P.J.O. Otieno.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya clarified the issue of costs in the appeal of Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited v. Sanlam General Insurance Limited & Royal Hisham Kenya Limited. The court concluded that the 2nd Respondent would not be liable for costs due to its passive role in the appeal process. This ruling underscores the court's discretion in cost allocation and emphasizes the importance of active participation in litigation to affect cost outcomes.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

This is the end of the summary preview.

Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited v Sanlam General Insurance Limited & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Document Summary

📢 Share this document with your network

Related Documents