Lilian s v caltex ltd

The Respondent through its counsel Mr. As I have already indicated, the appellants case is that it is a question ofjurisdiction as to whether the defendant would on the facts of this case beliable to the plaintiff in action in personam.

On all these occasions no objection was raised by the appellant against the respondent appearing in person when in fact he had an advocate on record. The duty of disclosure therefore applies notonly to material facts known to the applicant but alsoto any additional facts which he would have known ifhe had such inquiries.

Michael Mubea appeared for the respondent. Without it, a court has no power to make one more step. It cannot be raised if any fact has to be ascertained or if what is sought is the exercise of judicial discretion. Case law has crystallized the parameters within which a relief of summary Judgment can either be granted or with held.

On 11th day of May, the respondent appeared in person as usual, whereas Mr. The powers it was stated are exclusively awarded to the High Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. It is plain beyond a peradventure looking at these two telexes, that thecontract of sale was made between Caltex and SOSCO.

Satchu argued that if the warrant of arrest is lifted,the vessel might sail away and if at the end of the day the respondents aresuccessful, they will have lost an asset from which they could recoup thefruits of any judgment.

Where a court takes it upon itself to exercise a jurisdiction which it does not possess, its decision amounts to nothing. On the strength of awrit in rem taken out by Caltex Oil Kenya Ltd the respondent to thisappeal the High Court in purported exercise of its admiralty jurisdictionissued a warrant for the arrest of the motor vessel Lillian S on 5thDecember, and that vessel was duly arrested the following day.

Ojiambo that if the application was not granted irreparable injury would be occasioned to the respondents. The procedure and practice of the court of appeal are regulated by the rules of court made by the Rules Committee constituted under the appellate Jurisdiction Act cap 9.

Examples are an objection to the jurisdiction of the court, or a plea of limitation, or a submission that the parties are bound by the contract giving rise to the suit to refer the dispute to arbitration.

The learned Judge held on the evidence before him that the claim byCaltex fell within the ambit of Sections 20 2 m and 21 4 of theSupreme Court Act, I therefore take the view that Section 20 2 m of the Act was notsatisfied and so the claim does not fall under Section 21 4the HighCourt did not have admiralty jurisdiction and so Caltex Oil Kenya Ltdis not entitled to invoke the local jurisdiction in rem against the vesseland to arrest her.

The Lillian v Caltex

It was not delivered to the ship either because it was required for itsoperation or because it had been bought by or sold, to the owners of theship. Right to clean environment is provided under article of the Constitution. There was a contract whereby the plaintiffs agreed to supply and SOSCOagreed to buy metric tonnes of fuel oil and pursuant to that contract,the plaintiffs delivered 5, He attached copies of a delivery note and aninvoice.

The application got under way before Mr Justice Bosire on the 14thFebruary,and on 28th Februaryhe delivered his rulingdismissing the appellants application with costs in cause.

It is againstthat decision that the appellants have now appealed. On the basis the Judge would have seenstraightway that the appellants could not have been held liable for theclaim in an action in personam and in consequence would have declinedto make the order sought.

See the ShipbrokersManual Vol. As for lack of inclusion of the memorandum of apppearence in the record of appeal, though we agree that this is the correct position, we note that the respondent is however raising this issue belatedly for the first time during the submissions at the hearing of this appeal.

Being dissatisfied with the order of reference to arbitration, the appellant filed Nai. To receive a report on the purported issue of shares in the Company and pass such resolutions in connection therewith as the Board shall think fit. The position, he observed, would be different if the applications had been heard and refused on merits and not merely struck out for reasons which could have been remedied in subsequent applications.

The limits of this authority are imposed by the statute, charter, or commission under which the court is constituted, and may be extended or restricted by the like means.

On any ex parteapplication, the fact that the Court is asked to grant reliefwithout the person against whom the relief is soughthaving the opportunity to be heard makes it imperativethat the applicant should make full and frank disclosureof all facts known to him or which should have beenknown to him had he made all such inquiries as werereasonable and proper in the circumstances.

It is imbued with all the powers of the High Court.

Jurisdiction of Environment and Land Court Kenya

For that reason alone I would respectfully hold that the learned trial Judgemisapprehended the issue urged before him and consequently came to aKenya Law Reports [] KLRwrong conclusion. The powers it was stated are exclusively awarded to the High Court.

Where a court has no jurisdiction, there would be no basis for a continuation of proceedings pending other evidence. Lastly in the celebrated case of Owners of the Motor Vehicle M.V. Lillians versus Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited () KLR1.

At page 14 line Nyarangi JA (as he then was) had this to say: “By jurisdiction is meant the authority which a court has to decide matters that are litigated before it or to take cognizance of matters presented in a.

Feb 20,  · Legal practice tradition require that this being a jurisdictional clause, it had to be followed to the latter because as held in the locus classicus case of LILLIAN S” V CALTEX OIL (KENYA) LTD KLR 1 that jurisdiction is paramount.

Caltex Oil, the respondent to this appeal, issued a writ in rem against the motor vessel Lilian S endorsed with a claim for Kshs 6,/55 alleged to be due and owing from the owners of. The locus classicus on jurisdiction is the celebrated case of Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S” v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd [] KLR 1 where Justice Nyarangi of the Court of Appeal held as follows.

The locus classicus on jurisdiction is the celebrated case of Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S” v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd [] KLR 1 where Justice Nyarangi of the Court of Appeal held as follows.

In the Kenyan case of Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S” v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited [13], Justice Nyarangi explained the importance of jurisdiction in the following terms: Jurisdiction is everything.

Lilian s v caltex ltd
Rated 5/5 based on 21 review
Misc. Appl. 29 of - Kenya Law