[2019] KEELC 2451 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 2451 (KLR)

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to consolidate Kitale ELC No. 52 of 2011 with Eldoret ELC No. 306 of 2016 because the latter suit was still pending before the Eldoret court and had not been transferred to the Kitale court. The provisions cited by the applicants—Order 3 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 2451 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Abdul Muthee Mulama; Plaintiff: Ernest Sikuku; Defendant: Eglyn Chepchirchir Choge; Defendant: Benjamin Kichwen; Defendant: Christian Choge; Defendant: Joseph Ang’ang’a
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 52 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Consolidation of Suits
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Consolidation of Suits, Transfer of Suits, Jurisdiction of Court, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Consolidation of Suits Transfer of Suits Jurisdiction of Court Land Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdul Muthee Mulama

Plaintiff

Ernest Sikuku

Plaintiff

Eglyn Chepchirchir Choge

Defendant

Benjamin Kichwen

Defendant

Christian Choge

Defendant

Joseph Ang’ang’a

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Consolidation of Suits

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to consolidate a suit before it with another suit pending in a different court of parallel jurisdiction.
  2. 2 Whether the application for consolidation is competent in the absence of a prior transfer of the related suit to the current court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to consolidate Kitale ELC No. 52 of 2011 with Eldoret ELC No. 306 of 2016 because the latter suit was still pending before the Eldoret court and had not been transferred to the Kitale court. The provisions cited by the applicants—Order 3 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 1A, 1B, 3, and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act—were inapplicable to the consolidation of suits already filed in different courts. The proper procedure would have been to first seek a transfer of the Eldoret suit to the Kitale court. Without such a transfer, the application for consolidation was premature and incompetent. The court therefore dismissed the application...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The application dated 8/5/2019 is dismissed as incompetent.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the respondents.