Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in judgment

Global Woods Hardware Limited v KCB Bank Kenya Limited & another (Land Case E006 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2024] KEELC 5860 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
28 August 2024
733 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court confirmed that anyone can freely withdraw their own lawsuit at any time before judgment, with courts only deciding who pays costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff instituted a suit by plaint dated 22nd August 2024, together with a contemporaneous application seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from selling, disposing of or dealing with L.R No. 27303 (C.R 42227) and L.R No. 1956/462 (C.R 43939) pending the hearing of the suit, supported by an affidavit of Patrick Mundia Nyamu. The court directed that the injunction application be heard inter partes by oral submissions on 28th August 2024. Before that date, the plaintiff filed a notice of withdrawal of the suit dated 27th August 2024. In a short ruling delivered on 28th August 2024, E.K. Wabwoto J held that at common law a plaintiff has an absolute right to discontinue a suit at any stage before verdict or judgment, a right given statutory recognition by Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010. The court applied the Court of Appeal's decision in Beijing Industrial Designing & Researching Institute v Lagoon Development Limited and the Supreme Court's decision in Nicholas Kiptoo arap Korir Salat v IEBC, which affirm that a party's right to withdraw a matter cannot be taken away and that the court may only make orders as to costs where appropriate. The court adopted the notice of withdrawal, marked the entire suit as withdrawn, made no orders as to costs, and closed the file.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the plaintiff's notice of withdrawal of the suit dated 27th August 2024 should be adopted
  2. 2.Whether the plaintiff has an absolute right to discontinue the suit before judgment

Key legal issues

#
01

Right of a plaintiff to withdraw a suit before judgment

Holding

The plaintiff has an absolute, unconditional right under Order 25 Rules 1 and 2(1) to discontinue the suit at any time before judgment; the court adopted the notice of withdrawal.

Reasoning

At common law a plaintiff may discontinue at any stage before verdict or judgment, a right given statutory recognition by Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010. The Court of Appeal in Beijing Industrial Designing and the Supreme Court in Salat v IEBC confirm the right cannot be questioned or taken away; the court may only make an order as to costs where appropriate. The notice of withdrawal was therefore adopted and the suit marked withdrawn with no orders as to costs.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A plaintiff's right to withdraw a suit before judgment is absolute; a court cannot bar withdrawal and may only make orders as to costs.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Plaintiff's notice of withdrawal of the suit dated 27th August 2024 is hereby adopted by this court
  2. 2.The Plaintiff's entire suit is hereby marked as withdrawn
  3. 3.There shall be no orders as to costs
  4. 4.The file is closed

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Order 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

In view of the foregoing this court hereby issues the following orders
p. 2disposition
The Plaintifi’s entire suit is hereby marked as withdrawn.
p. 3final orders - withdrawal
There shall be no orders as to costs.
p. 3costs
a party’s right to withdraw a matter before the court cannot be taken way. A court cannot bar a party from withdrawing his matter.
p. 2right of withdrawal (Supreme Court, Salat v IEBC)

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Judgment does not state the case number, the names of the defendants, or the title of the suit; only the plaintiff (deponent of supporting affidavit) is named.

minor

Order 25 rule 2(2) is reproduced although only Rules 1 and 2(1) are relied on for the withdrawal.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Global Woods Hardware Limited v KCB Bank Kenya Limited & another (Land Case E006 of 2024)  (Environment and Land) [2024] KEELC 5860 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/5860/eng@2024-08-28

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.