' RULING
1. This is a Ruling in respect of the Plaintiff/Applicant’s application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 27th June, 2025.
2. It seeks the following orders;
1) Spent
2) THAT the Plaintiff b granted lave to amend the pleadings specifically the Summons to Enter Appearance and Request for Judgment, to correctly reflect her name as Grace Cherotich Lang’at instead of Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at.
3) THAT the Honourable Court b pleased to adopt and record the correct name of the Plaintiff as Grace Cherotich Lang’at for purposes of all proceedings and the final Judgment herein
4) THAT this Honourable Court do make such other order(s) as it may deem fit, fair and just in the circumstances in the interest of justice.
Background Facts
3. The facts of this case are fairly straight forward. The Plaintiff maintains that due to a typographical error, she filed pleadings in the suit erroneously. All along she has been referring to herself as Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at instead of her correct name, which is Grace Cherotich Lang’at .
4. The Plaintiff pleads that this is an innocent clerical error. That no prejudice will be occasioned to the Defendant if the orders sought are granted.
5. The suit is undefended. There is an interlocutory judgment against the Defendant this is in default of filing a Memorandum of Appearance and a Statement of Defence. The application is unopposed.
6. The application was made after the close of the Plaintiff’s case.
Issues for Determination
7. Having looked at the application and the submissions filed; the Court frames a single issue for determination.
a) Whether leave sho9ld be granted to the Plaintiff to amend her pleadings after the hearing has been closed.
Analysis
8. The power to amend pleadings is provided for by Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules which states as follows;
“3. Amendment of pleading with leave [Order 8, rule 3.]
(1) Subject to Order 1, rules 9 and 10, Order 24, rules 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the following
provisions of this rule, the court may at any stage of the proceedings, on such terms as to costs or otherwise as may be just and in such manner as it may direct, allow any party to
amend his pleadings.
(2) Where an application to the court for leave to make an amendment such as is mentioned in subrule (3), (4) or (5) is made after any relevant period of limitation current at the date of filing of the suit has expired, the court may nevertheless grant such leave in the circumstances mentioned in any such subrule if it thinks just so to do.
(3) An amendment to correct the name of a party may be allowed under subrule (2) notwithstanding that it is alleged that the effect of the amendment will be to substitute a new party if the court is satisfied that the mistake sought to be corrected was a genuine mistake and was not misleading or such as to cause any reasonable doubt as to the identity of the person intending to sue or intended to be sued.
(4) An amendment to alter the capacity in which a party sues (whether as plaintiff or as defendant by counterclaim) may be allowed under subrule (2) if the capacity in which the party will sue is one in which at the date of filing of the plaint or counterclaim, he could have sued.
(5) An amendment may be allowed under subrule (2) notwithstanding that its effect will be to add or substitute a new cause of action if the new cause of action arises out of the same facts or substantially the same facts as a cause of action in respect of which relief has already been claimed in the suit by the party applying for leave to make the
amendment.”
9. The General principle in law is that amendments of pleading should be freely allowed to facilitate the parties to plead their cases fully. This in turn helps the Court to conclusively determine the dispute between the parties.
10. The Court has examined the amendment sought. It merely seeks to correct the name of the Plaintiff. Her middle name is Cherotich and not Cheruiyot as placed. Her first and last names ae correctly pleaded in the proceedings.
11. The Court reads no mischief in the application for amendment. The Court is persuaded that this was an innocent clerical mistake inadvertently made.
12. The Court has considered the decisions in Coffee Board of Kenya v Thika Coffee Mills Limited & 2 others [2014] KECA 409 (KLR) and Evergreen Marine (Singapore) PTE Limited & another v Petra Development Services Limited [2023] KECA 1282 (KLR) . The amendment sought in this suit does not alter or change the character of the Plaintiff’s case. The cause of action still remains the same.
13. The Court is minded to allow the application. As to costs the same should be in the cause.
Determination
14. The Plaintiff’s application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 27th June, 2025 is allowed as follows;
a) THAT leave is HEREBY granted to the Plaintiff to amend the pleadings herein to correctly reflect the Plaintiff’s name as Grace Cherotich Lang’at instead of Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at .
b) THAT for the purposes of these proceedings the Honourable Court adopts and records the correct name of the Plaintiff as Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at for purposes of all these proceedings including proceedings subsequent to this order as well as judgment that may issue in this suit.
c) That the costs of this application be in the cause.
15. It is so ordered.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Nairobi this 25th day of September, 2025.
NJOROGE BENJAMIN K.
JUDGE
In the presence of
Mr. Cheruiyot for the Plaintiff/Applicant.
N/A for the Defendant/Respondent.
Mr. Peter Wabwire - Court Assistant.
'
1. This is a Ruling in respect of the Plaintiff/Applicant’s application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 27th June, 2025.
2. It seeks the following orders;
1) Spent
2) THAT the Plaintiff b granted lave to amend the pleadings specifically the Summons to Enter Appearance and Request for Judgment, to correctly reflect her name as Grace Cherotich Lang’at instead of Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at.
3) THAT the Honourable Court b pleased to adopt and record the correct name of the Plaintiff as Grace Cherotich Lang’at for purposes of all proceedings and the final Judgment herein
4) THAT this Honourable Court do make such other order(s) as it may deem fit, fair and just in the circumstances in the interest of justice.
Background Facts
3. The facts of this case are fairly straight forward. The Plaintiff maintains that due to a typographical error, she filed pleadings in the suit erroneously. All along she has been referring to herself as Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at instead of her correct name, which is Grace Cherotich Lang’at .
4. The Plaintiff pleads that this is an innocent clerical error. That no prejudice will be occasioned to the Defendant if the orders sought are granted.
5. The suit is undefended. There is an interlocutory judgment against the Defendant this is in default of filing a Memorandum of Appearance and a Statement of Defence. The application is unopposed.
6. The application was made after the close of the Plaintiff’s case.
Issues for Determination
7. Having looked at the application and the submissions filed; the Court frames a single issue for determination.
a) Whether leave sho9ld be granted to the Plaintiff to amend her pleadings after the hearing has been closed.
Analysis
8. The power to amend pleadings is provided for by Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules which states as follows;
“3. Amendment of pleading with leave [Order 8, rule 3.]
(1) Subject to Order 1, rules 9 and 10, Order 24, rules 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the following
provisions of this rule, the court may at any stage of the proceedings, on such terms as to costs or otherwise as may be just and in such manner as it may direct, allow any party to
amend his pleadings.
(2) Where an application to the court for leave to make an amendment such as is mentioned in subrule (3), (4) or (5) is made after any relevant period of limitation current at the date of filing of the suit has expired, the court may nevertheless grant such leave in the circumstances mentioned in any such subrule if it thinks just so to do.
(3) An amendment to correct the name of a party may be allowed under subrule (2) notwithstanding that it is alleged that the effect of the amendment will be to substitute a new party if the court is satisfied that the mistake sought to be corrected was a genuine mistake and was not misleading or such as to cause any reasonable doubt as to the identity of the person intending to sue or intended to be sued.
(4) An amendment to alter the capacity in which a party sues (whether as plaintiff or as defendant by counterclaim) may be allowed under subrule (2) if the capacity in which the party will sue is one in which at the date of filing of the plaint or counterclaim, he could have sued.
(5) An amendment may be allowed under subrule (2) notwithstanding that its effect will be to add or substitute a new cause of action if the new cause of action arises out of the same facts or substantially the same facts as a cause of action in respect of which relief has already been claimed in the suit by the party applying for leave to make the
amendment.”
9. The General principle in law is that amendments of pleading should be freely allowed to facilitate the parties to plead their cases fully. This in turn helps the Court to conclusively determine the dispute between the parties.
10. The Court has examined the amendment sought. It merely seeks to correct the name of the Plaintiff. Her middle name is Cherotich and not Cheruiyot as placed. Her first and last names ae correctly pleaded in the proceedings.
11. The Court reads no mischief in the application for amendment. The Court is persuaded that this was an innocent clerical mistake inadvertently made.
12. The Court has considered the decisions in Coffee Board of Kenya v Thika Coffee Mills Limited & 2 others [2014] KECA 409 (KLR) and Evergreen Marine (Singapore) PTE Limited & another v Petra Development Services Limited [2023] KECA 1282 (KLR) . The amendment sought in this suit does not alter or change the character of the Plaintiff’s case. The cause of action still remains the same.
13. The Court is minded to allow the application. As to costs the same should be in the cause.
Determination
14. The Plaintiff’s application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 27th June, 2025 is allowed as follows;
a) THAT leave is HEREBY granted to the Plaintiff to amend the pleadings herein to correctly reflect the Plaintiff’s name as Grace Cherotich Lang’at instead of Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at .
b) THAT for the purposes of these proceedings the Honourable Court adopts and records the correct name of the Plaintiff as Grace Cheruiyot Lang’at for purposes of all these proceedings including proceedings subsequent to this order as well as judgment that may issue in this suit.
c) That the costs of this application be in the cause.
15. It is so ordered.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Nairobi this 25th day of September, 2025.
NJOROGE BENJAMIN K.
JUDGE
In the presence of
Mr. Cheruiyot for the Plaintiff/Applicant.
N/A for the Defendant/Respondent.
Mr. Peter Wabwire - Court Assistant.
'