GK v County Executive Committee Member in Charge of Finance Nairobi County; GK (Minor Suing through Next Friend and Grandmother FNK) (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 6629 (KLR)

GK v County Executive Committee Member in Charge of Finance Nairobi County; GK (Minor Suing through Next Friend and Grandmother FNK) (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E131 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 6629 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (22 May 2025) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 6629 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Judicial Review

Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E131 of 2025

RE Aburili, J

May 22, 2025

Between

GK

Applicant

and

County Executive Committee Member in Charge of Finance Nairobi County

Respondent

and

GK (Minor Suing through Next Friend and Grandmother FNK)

Interested Party

Ruling

1. The application dated 8th May 2025 is not certified urgent. On the merits thereof, I observe that the decree sought to be satisfied was issued vide judgment delivered on 22/9/2010 vide Nairobi CMCC 5818/2008.

2. Section 4(4) of the Limitation of Actions Act provides that a judgment or decree has a lifespan of 12 years. No application for mandamus to compel settlement of decree can be brought after 12 years.

3. From 22/9/2010 to date is over 12 years. Although the applicant claims that she filed application for leave which were struck out with leave to bring fresh applications this is the only application which is before this court for consideration of leave to apply.

4. Where a suit is filed and withdrawn or struck out, time does not stop running nor does it wait for the person. What this means is that if the original suit or proceeding was filed within the limitation period but struck out or withdrawn and the claimant attempts to file it again after the limitation period has lapsed, the new suit will be statute barred, unless the exceptions under the Limitation of Actions Act apply.

5. In other words, the law has no stop the clock provision for suits which are struck out. The new suit is treated as a new separate suit and not a continuation of the struck out suit.

6. As stated above, where a suit is withdrawn or struck out, the time between the filing of that suit and its termination does not suspend limitation. Once time has run out, no relief is available.

7. Accordingly, as the decree sought to be enforced against the Respondent in this case is stale by operation of law and is extinguished by over 14 years, the leave sought is unavailable to the applicant.

8. The application dated 8/5/2025 is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

9. Applicant’s Counsel to be notified forthwith.

10. This file is closed

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2025. R.E. ABURILIJUDGE