Vide application 17th March 2025 the Applicant sought that the court issues orders of stay in Kehancha SPMCC No. E029 OF 2024 and E059 of 2024 between the parties pending hearing and determination of the application and Migori CMCCC NO E041 OF 2020 as they are sub judice the suit in Migori CMCCC No. E041 of 2020.
The application was premised on the grounds on its face and the supporting affidavit of Stephen Odera sworn on 17th March 2025 to the effect that the claim by the Applicant in the suit in Migori arose out of breach of contract between the parties in field No. 182011000162. The deponent averred that Kehancha SPMCCC No. E029 OF 2024 and E059 of 2024 were filed after the Migori E041 of 2020 and that they arise out of the same field being field No. 182011000162 and are seeking similar prayers before the courts and are therefore sub judice and therefore an abuse of court process as the Respondent intentionally misled the court in their pleadings in Kehancha Law Courts that he had no other pending case.
The Applicant argued that they stand to suffer irreparable loss if the Respondent is allowed to proceed and prosecute the suits before Kehancha Law Court.
This application was opposed by the grounds of opposition dated 3rd June 2025.
Directions were taken for hearing of the application by way of written submissions. The court has considered the application and the submissions and the issue for determination is whether the Applicant has satisfied the court for issuance of the orders sought.
From the Plaint dated 9th May 2024 in Kehancha SPMCC No. E058 of 2024 the claim arose out of contract relating to field No 182011000162 and Account No 79641 in which the Respondent herein is claiming damages for breach of contract. The letter from M/S Abisai and Company Advocates dated 21st December 2021 and M/S Kerario Marwa and Company Advocates dated 14th January 2021 alludes to these facts. The area of land the Respondent claims to have contracted to grow sugarcane is 1.27 Ha and the expected yield for each cycle is 127 tons
In Migori CMCCC No. 41 of 2020 the Applicant is also claiming that the Respondent breached the contract between them in contract dated 8th January 2018 on a field measuring 1.0Ha. The Plaint does not disclose the Field Number, Account or even serial No of the contract in question.
In Kehancha SPMCCC No. E029 of 2024, the Respondent is claiming breach of contract in relation to contract Serial No 93032 in which he agreed to grow sugarcane on land measuring 1.4Ha and the Applicant supplied inputs through Invoice No 067509 dated 16th March 2019.
From the pleadings placed before the court, it is evident that each suit is anchored on a separate and distinct sugarcane growing contract between the Applicant and the Respondent, distinguishable by a different contract serial number, a different acreage a different year of contracting and different parcel or field number.
Each contract created its own rights and obligations, and the alleged breach in each suit relates to performance or non-performance under that specific contract. The causes of action are therefore distinct and independent.
Although the suits raise similar legal questions relating to breach of contract and compensation, the factual inquiries necessary to resolve each claim—such as proof of acreage, maturity cycles, pricing, breach and quantum—are contract-specific. Consolidation in such circumstances risks conflation of evidence and may obscure the issues rather than promote clarity.
The Applicant further alleged abuse of the court process. However, the mere filing of separate suits founded on distinct contracts does not, without more, amount to abuse. Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Act requires suits to be instituted in courts of the lowest competent jurisdiction, and the Respondent’s decision to file separate claims in the subordinate court for separate contracts cannot be faulted on that basis alone.
In the circumstances this court finds that the Applicant has not shown how the suits in the different courts arose from the same cause of action. The application therefore lacks merit and the same is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MIGORI THIS 29th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026.
The application was premised on the grounds on its face and the supporting affidavit of Stephen Odera sworn on 17th March 2025 to the effect that the claim by the Applicant in the suit in Migori arose out of breach of contract between the parties in field No. 182011000162. The deponent averred that Kehancha SPMCCC No. E029 OF 2024 and E059 of 2024 were filed after the Migori E041 of 2020 and that they arise out of the same field being field No. 182011000162 and are seeking similar prayers before the courts and are therefore sub judice and therefore an abuse of court process as the Respondent intentionally misled the court in their pleadings in Kehancha Law Courts that he had no other pending case.
The Applicant argued that they stand to suffer irreparable loss if the Respondent is allowed to proceed and prosecute the suits before Kehancha Law Court.
This application was opposed by the grounds of opposition dated 3rd June 2025.
Directions were taken for hearing of the application by way of written submissions. The court has considered the application and the submissions and the issue for determination is whether the Applicant has satisfied the court for issuance of the orders sought.
From the Plaint dated 9th May 2024 in Kehancha SPMCC No. E058 of 2024 the claim arose out of contract relating to field No 182011000162 and Account No 79641 in which the Respondent herein is claiming damages for breach of contract. The letter from M/S Abisai and Company Advocates dated 21st December 2021 and M/S Kerario Marwa and Company Advocates dated 14th January 2021 alludes to these facts. The area of land the Respondent claims to have contracted to grow sugarcane is 1.27 Ha and the expected yield for each cycle is 127 tons
In Migori CMCCC No. 41 of 2020 the Applicant is also claiming that the Respondent breached the contract between them in contract dated 8th January 2018 on a field measuring 1.0Ha. The Plaint does not disclose the Field Number, Account or even serial No of the contract in question.
In Kehancha SPMCCC No. E029 of 2024, the Respondent is claiming breach of contract in relation to contract Serial No 93032 in which he agreed to grow sugarcane on land measuring 1.4Ha and the Applicant supplied inputs through Invoice No 067509 dated 16th March 2019.
From the pleadings placed before the court, it is evident that each suit is anchored on a separate and distinct sugarcane growing contract between the Applicant and the Respondent, distinguishable by a different contract serial number, a different acreage a different year of contracting and different parcel or field number.
Each contract created its own rights and obligations, and the alleged breach in each suit relates to performance or non-performance under that specific contract. The causes of action are therefore distinct and independent.
Although the suits raise similar legal questions relating to breach of contract and compensation, the factual inquiries necessary to resolve each claim—such as proof of acreage, maturity cycles, pricing, breach and quantum—are contract-specific. Consolidation in such circumstances risks conflation of evidence and may obscure the issues rather than promote clarity.
The Applicant further alleged abuse of the court process. However, the mere filing of separate suits founded on distinct contracts does not, without more, amount to abuse. Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Act requires suits to be instituted in courts of the lowest competent jurisdiction, and the Respondent’s decision to file separate claims in the subordinate court for separate contracts cannot be faulted on that basis alone.
In the circumstances this court finds that the Applicant has not shown how the suits in the different courts arose from the same cause of action. The application therefore lacks merit and the same is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MIGORI THIS 29th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026.