[2002] KEHC 257 (KLR)

[2002] KEHC 257 (KLR)

The court found that confusion regarding representation by counsel and possible compromise in service of court process justified setting aside the previous order of 5th February 1999. Additionally, since the subject matter was land, the court emphasized the importance of allowing parties to exhaust all legal avenues...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] KEHC 257 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kineni Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd; Applicant: Geoffrey Matoke; Respondent: Nyachera Masare
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Children Miscellaneous Application 363 of 1993
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review or Set Aside Previous Court Order
Outcome
application allowed; previous order set aside
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Setting Aside Orders, Service of Process, Representation by Counsel
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Review of Court Orders Setting Aside Orders Service of Process Representation by Counsel

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kineni Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd

Applicant

Geoffrey Matoke

Applicant

Nyachera Masare

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review or Set Aside Previous Court Order

  1. 1 Whether the order of 5th February 1999 should be reviewed or set aside.
  2. 2 Whether there was proper representation by counsel and service of court process.
  3. 3 Whether previous proceedings addressed the same subject matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that confusion regarding representation by counsel and possible compromise in service of court process justified setting aside the previous order of 5th February 1999. Additionally, since the subject matter was land, the court emphasized the importance of allowing parties to exhaust all legal avenues before final orders are made. Consequently, the order was set aside and each party was ordered to bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

application allowed; previous order set aside

Orders

  • The order of 5th February 1999 is hereby set aside.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.