Search court decisions

…The appellant submitted that the trial court erred in law and fact in finding that the appellant’s defence was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process.…

…It includes the deliberate use of the court and court process to settle vendetta, to intimidate, to inflict fear and involves the bringing of matters to Court that have no justiciable cause of action”. [19] We have examined…

…Counsel deposed that the application was misconceived, bad in law and amounted to abuse of the court process as in his view, it was solely meant to delay the respondent’s inalienable right of enjoyment of fruits of her judgment…

…Relying on the authority of Muchanga Instruments Ltd v Safaris unlimited (Africa) Ltd & 2 others (2009) KLR 229, the respondent submitted that the application amounted to an abuse of the court process as it was designed to…

…Thirdly, the condition/ requirement guards against frivolous appeals which could be aimed at delaying execution of the decree hence prevents abuse of the court process.…

…This court is therefore left wondering as to whether this appeal was merely filed to buy time and which would amount to an abuse of the court process.…

…Process. 6.…

…The purpose of the sub-judice rule is to stop the filing of a multiplicity of suits between the same parties or those claiming under them over the same subject matter so as to avoid abuse of the court process and diminish…

…process were the court to countenance such execution.…

…process.…

…The answer to that question should lie with whether there was proper service of the requisite court process.…

…The trial court noted that the appellant did not seek to have the person or persons, who served the court process, to be availed for cross-examination on the alleged service.…

…The respondent therefore contends that the application is frivolous, vexatious, an abuse of the court process, and should be dismissed. 14.…

…The Respondent further submits that the application amounts to an abuse of the court process.…

…In response, the Claimant, Francis Mboi Mwangi, filed a Replying Affidavit dated 20th May 2024, contending that the application was an abuse of the court process.…

…The learned magistrate erred in law and fact in finding and holding that there was proper service of the court process in the circumstances of the case. ii.…

…In response, the Claimant, Francis Mboi Mwangi, filed a Replying Affidavit dated 20th May 2024, contending that the application was an abuse of the court process.…

…The learned magistrate erred in law and fact in finding and holding that there was proper service of the court process in the circumstances of the case. ii.…

…The Appellants contend that they were not properly served with court process and that the trial court misdirected itself by applying the wrong legal principles and failing to exercise its discretion judiciously. 5.…

…The appeal turns on the following issues: a) Whether the Appellants were properly served with the statement of claim and court process; b) Whether the Learned Adjudicator applied the correct legal principles in declining…

…She stated that the Application is unmeritorious, vexatious, a waste of the Court’s time and an abuse of the court process; that the issues herein could have been raised in response to the NTSC or at the hearing thereof;…

…This is an abuse of the court process and the Court must guard against and protect itself from such abuse. Accordingly, this Court declines to assume jurisdiction over the NTSC, which is properly before the Hon.…

…It maintains that it was not legally absent from the proceedings and was entitled to be served with court process.…

…Once a party had notified the address of service in proceedings, the party ought to be served with court process at all times.…

…The Continued pendency of this Appeal serves no useful purpose and is an abuse of the court process, iv. It is in the interest of justice and judicial economy to strike out this Appeal. 4.…

…The application is opposed vide the replying affidavit of Faith Mutio Mutuku she depones that; 1) THAT the application is misconceived, without merit, and an abuse of the court process as it seeks to prematurely curtail the…

…of the court. 6.…

…The material sought is therefore not essential for the just determination of the dispute. 3) Whether the application is frivolous, vexatious and abuse of the court process 17.…

…process. 4.…

…That is what abuse of court process defines. The trial court could not entertain that issue when the same was actively before the appellate court.…

…It maintains that it was not legally absent from the proceedings and was entitled to be served with court process.…

…Once a party had notified the address of service in proceedings, the party ought to be served with court process at all times.…

…invokes Order 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeks to introduce fresh causes of action outside the appellate jurisdiction of this Court, contravenes Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Act and amounts to an abuse of the court…

…process. 3.…

…of the Court.…

…In response, the Appellant argued that the instant application is aimed at delaying the cause of justice and is an abuse of the Court process.…

…The appellant/Respondent is of the submission the 8 th Respondent/Applicant’s application is abuse of the court process and should therefore be struck out.…

…I agree that the instant application was filed in abuse of the court process. 18. In the end, the application dated 25 th September, 2025 is found to be incompetent and is without merit.…