'
1. I have considered the Application dated 19th February, 2024 together with the affidavit in support, the affidavit sworn in reply, the submissions of the parties, and the applicable law.
2. The sole issue is whether the intended interested party ought to be joined?
3. The interested Party’s submission was that it has a stake in these proceedings and would be affected by the decision of the Court whether it is made either way.
4. Reliance was placed in the Supreme Court Case of Communications Commission of Kenya and 4 others Vs Royal Media Services Limited and & others Petition NO. 15 of (2024) eKLR, relying on its earlier decision in the Mumo Matemu case which defined interested party in the following manner:-
"i. An interested party is one who has a stake in the proceedings though he or she was not a party the cause ab initio. He or she is one who will be affected by the decision of the court when it is made either way. Such a person feels that his or her interests will not be well articulated unless himself or she herself appears in the proceedings and champions his or her cause."
5. Similarly, reliance was placed on the case of Meme Vs R (2004) EA 124, where it was held that a party could be enjoined in a matter for the reasons that:-
i. Joinder of a person because his presence will result in the complete settlement of all the questions involved in the proceedings.
ii. Joinder to provide protection for the rights of a party who would otherwise be adversely affected in law.
iii. Joinder to prevent a likely course of proliferation of litigation.
6. The Applicant submitted that the Intended interested Party’s interest in the suit stems from ELC/E080/2023 : Jonco Company Limited –vs-Iskaashato Kenya Limited & Others, where the 1st -3rd Applicants/Respondents herein fraudulently using the 4th Interested Party Company are laying claim to NAIROBI/BLOCK49/245 belonging to the Intended Interested Party.
7. On the other hand, the Respondents primary opposition to the Application was based on the submission that the Intended Interested party is already a defendant in the above said matter in the ELC.
8. Noting the submission by the Applicant, and bearing in mind that the questions relating to ownership of the corporate entity in the present matter relates directly to the issues of ownership in ELC E080 of 2023, I am persuaded that the Applicant has a sufficient and proximate stake in the matter at hand. This is because the Applicant’s proprietary rights in the matter before the ELC may be affected by proceedings in this matter.
9. Finally, I do not think that undue prejudice will be occasioned by joining the Applicant to the present proceedings.
10. Accordingly, I find that the Application is with merit and is allowed. The Applicant is hereby joined as an Interested Party. Costs shall be in the cause.
'
1. I have considered the Application dated 19th February, 2024 together with the affidavit in support, the affidavit sworn in reply, the submissions of the parties, and the applicable law.
2. The sole issue is whether the intended interested party ought to be joined?
3. The interested Party’s submission was that it has a stake in these proceedings and would be affected by the decision of the Court whether it is made either way.
4. Reliance was placed in the Supreme Court Case of Communications Commission of Kenya and 4 others Vs Royal Media Services Limited and & others Petition NO. 15 of (2024) eKLR, relying on its earlier decision in the Mumo Matemu case which defined interested party in the following manner:-
"i. An interested party is one who has a stake in the proceedings though he or she was not a party the cause ab initio. He or she is one who will be affected by the decision of the court when it is made either way. Such a person feels that his or her interests will not be well articulated unless himself or she herself appears in the proceedings and champions his or her cause."
5. Similarly, reliance was placed on the case of Meme Vs R (2004) EA 124, where it was held that a party could be enjoined in a matter for the reasons that:-
i. Joinder of a person because his presence will result in the complete settlement of all the questions involved in the proceedings.
ii. Joinder to provide protection for the rights of a party who would otherwise be adversely affected in law.
iii. Joinder to prevent a likely course of proliferation of litigation.
6. The Applicant submitted that the Intended interested Party’s interest in the suit stems from ELC/E080/2023 : Jonco Company Limited –vs-Iskaashato Kenya Limited & Others, where the 1st -3rd Applicants/Respondents herein fraudulently using the 4th Interested Party Company are laying claim to NAIROBI/BLOCK49/245 belonging to the Intended Interested Party.
7. On the other hand, the Respondents primary opposition to the Application was based on the submission that the Intended Interested party is already a defendant in the above said matter in the ELC.
8. Noting the submission by the Applicant, and bearing in mind that the questions relating to ownership of the corporate entity in the present matter relates directly to the issues of ownership in ELC E080 of 2023, I am persuaded that the Applicant has a sufficient and proximate stake in the matter at hand. This is because the Applicant’s proprietary rights in the matter before the ELC may be affected by proceedings in this matter.
9. Finally, I do not think that undue prejudice will be occasioned by joining the Applicant to the present proceedings.
10. Accordingly, I find that the Application is with merit and is allowed. The Applicant is hereby joined as an Interested Party. Costs shall be in the cause.
'