[2022] KEHC 15572 (KLR)
The court held that the Deputy Registrar, not the judge, is the proper officer to adopt and enter judgment on a consent filed by parties, as per the Civil Procedure Rules. The court emphasized that once parties have settled their dispute by a written consent, the court should not delay or keep the matter pending...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 15572 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Timothy Abucheri; Respondent: Khalwala Opara Stephen
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 19 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Directions on Adoption of Consent and Ministerial Powers
- Outcome
- Directions issued clarifying the proper procedure for adoption of consents; Deputy Registrar to handle consents unless their genuineness is challenged.
- Judges
- PJO Otieno
- Legal Topics
- Consent Judgments, Powers of Deputy Registrar, Ministerial Actions, Settlement of Disputes
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Timothy Abucheri
Appellant
Khalwala Opara Stephen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Directions on Adoption of Consent and Ministerial Powers
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Deputy Registrar or the Judge is the proper officer to adopt and enter judgment on a consent filed by parties.
- 2 Whether the court can postpone or refuse to adopt a consent between parties except in cases of void contracts.
- 3 What is the proper procedure for handling consents filed by parties in civil appeals.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Deputy Registrar, not the judge, is the proper officer to adopt and enter judgment on a consent filed by parties, as per the Civil Procedure Rules. The court emphasized that once parties have settled their dispute by a written consent, the court should not delay or keep the matter pending unless there is a valid reason such as the consent being void. The judge directed that consents should be minuted and endorsed by the Deputy Registrar, and only in cases where the genuineness of the consent is challenged should the matter be placed before the court. The prolonged pendency of the appeal after the filing of the consent was improper and contrary to the spirit of...
Court Disposition
Directions issued clarifying the proper procedure for adoption of consents; Deputy Registrar to handle consents unless their genuineness is challenged.
Orders
- Consents by parties to be minuted by the Registry and endorsed by the Deputy Registrar.
- Clarifications or confirmations regarding consents to be made before the Deputy Registrar.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Abucheri v Stephen (Civil Appeal 19 of 2018) [2022] KEHC 15572 (KLR) (14 November 2022) (Directions)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 15572 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kakamega
Civil Appeal 19 of 2018
PJO Otieno, J
November 14, 2022
Between
Timothy Abucheri
Appellant
and
Khalwala Opara Stephen
Respondent
Directions
1. It is on record that on the January 15, 2019 the advocates for the parties filed a consent to mark the appeal settled on unequivocal terms. The consent was minuted in the files for ministerial action by the Deputy Registrar pursuant to Order 49 (2) (b) and (c) Civil Procedure Rules. When the file was placed before the Deputy Registrar, it was ordered that it be mentioned before the court to adopt the consent.
2. The law donates power to the DR to enter Judgment by the consent of the parties. It is not the duty of the judge to usurp the powers. Even where there is doubt as to the accuracy or authenticity of the consent, it should be the task of the Deputy Registrar to handle such.
3. It is the spirit of article 159 (2) c that parties be allowed to be in charge of their dispute and to retain the power to terminate or mitigate the dispute by consent. Once a consent is entered and reduced into writing, the court has no power to postpone it and force the parties to remain in dispute against their wish. Of course a consent may be declined by the court if it take the form of void contract, but that is a judicial discretion exercisable by the Deputy Registrar exercising the special powers donated to that office.
4. Here the court has improperly implied a dispute between the parties by keeping the appeal live since January, now for a period of more than 3½ years, when those parties are home assured that their dispute was settled by an agreement. That should not be expected of the court.
5. It is therefore the direction of the court that consents by parties be minuted by the Registry and endorsed by the Deputy Registrar and where there is a clarification or confirmation to be made by parties to such a consent that be done before the Deputy Registrar and not by the file, routinely and as a matter of course, being listed before the court to do the ministerial and special powers legally due for execution by the Deputy Registrar. Where however one of the parties denounce the consent and it becomes necessary to determine the genuineness or otherwise of the consent, matter may be placed before the court.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kakamega, this 14th day of November 2022. PATRICK J. O. OTIENOJUDGE