[2025] KEELC 5347 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st respondent failed to provide any material evidence or documentation to demonstrate that the appeal and the other referenced matters involved similar questions of fact or law. The mere assertion of similarity is insufficient; the applicant must place substantive material on record to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELC 5347 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: David Kirimi Bedford; Respondent: Christine Mukangi; Respondent: Lydia Wanjiru; Respondent: Mburu Njue; Respondent: Alex Kinyua; Respondent: Hellen Muthoni; Respondent: Eunice Kivuva; Respondent: Jane Wangechi; Respondent: Evaline Mukasi; Respondent: Regina Muthoni
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal E006 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Consolidation and Stay
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- YM Angima
- Legal Topics
- Consolidation of Suits, Stay of Proceedings, Pre Trial Procedure, Appeals Process
- 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
David Kirimi Bedford
Appellant
Christine Mukangi
Respondent
Lydia Wanjiru
Respondent
Mburu Njue
Respondent
Alex Kinyua
Respondent
Hellen Muthoni
Respondent
Eunice Kivuva
Respondent
Jane Wangechi
Respondent
Evaline Mukasi
Respondent
Regina Muthoni
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Consolidation and Stay
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for consolidation of the appeal with other related matters meets the legal threshold for consolidation.
- 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient material to demonstrate similarity of facts or law between the appeals.
- 3 Whether the proceedings in the current appeal should be stayed pending consolidation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st respondent failed to provide any material evidence or documentation to demonstrate that the appeal and the other referenced matters involved similar questions of fact or law. The mere assertion of similarity is insufficient; the applicant must place substantive material on record to justify consolidation. Furthermore, the provisions cited in support of the application (Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules) are inapplicable to appeals. As a result, the application for consolidation and stay was found to lack merit and was dismissed. The court further directed the respondents to file their submissions within 30 days, with judgment in the main appeal scheduled...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The chamber summons dated 14.10.2024 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
- Respondents are given 30 days to file and serve their respective submissions.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
35 paragraphs
Bedford v Mukangi & 8 others (Environment and Land Appeal E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5347 (KLR) (17 July 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 5347 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Environment and Land Appeal E006 of 2024
YM Angima, J
July 17, 2025
Between
David Kirimi Bedford
Appellant
and
Christine Mukangi
1st Respondent
Lydia Wanjiru
2nd Respondent
Mburu Njue
3rd Respondent
Alex Kinyua
4th Respondent
Hellen Muthoni
5th Respondent
Eunice Kivuva
6th Respondent
Jane Wangechi
7th Respondent
Evaline Mukasi
8th Respondent
Regina Muthoni
9th Respondent
Ruling
1. By a notice of motion dated 14. 10. 2024 expressed to be based upon Order XI Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21), and any other enabling provisions of the law the 1st respondent purported to seek the following orders.a.That the appeal before the honourable court for determination is the one dated 09. 02. 2024 and served to the defendant on 11. 04. 2024 case No. ELC E006 of 2024, appealing to be awarded costs vide case No. BPRT 192 of 2023. Case No.BRPT 192 was consolidated and determined under the lead case No. 250 of 2020. b.That the plaintiff has also filed a notice of taxation dated 26. 07. 2024 under case No. ELC E086 of 2022 a matter that was consolidated and determined under lead case No. 250 of 2020. c.That vide the said appeal, the defendant sough for the following orders;i.That this honourable court be pleased to order the consolidation of this suit that is appeal No. ELC E006 of 2024 and Notice of taxations under case ELC E086 of 2022 for the suit to be heard simultaneously.ii.That the further proceedings in this suit be stayed until further notice.iii.That the cost of this application be provided for.
2. The application was supported by an affidavit sworn by Christine Mukangi on even date. Just like the chamber summons, the affidavit had no clarity on exactly what the 1st respondent was seeking in the application. There is no indication on record of the appellant having filed a response. The provisions of Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules which were cited in the summons merely deal with pre-trial directions and conferences and have no application to appeals. It would appear that the 1st respondent wanted the instant appeal to be consolidated with ELCA No. 192 of 2023. However, the 1st respondent did not exhibit copies of the memorandum of appeal in the latter appeal hence the court is unable to tell what are the issues in dispute or issues for determination therein.
3. It is not sufficient for a party to allege that there are similar questions of fact or law involved in two or more pending appeals. The party who is seeking consolidation must place some material on record and also demonstrate the alleged similarity of facts or the law in those appeals. As matters stand now, the court finds absolutely no material evidence on the basis of which an order for consolidation can be made.
4. The upshot of the foregoing is that the court finds no merit in the chamber summons dated 14. 10. 2024. As a consequence, the court makes the following disposal orders;a.The chamber summons dated 14. 10. 2024 is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.b.Since the appellant has already filed written submissions on the appeal, the respondents are hereby given 30 days to file and serve their respective submissions.c.Judgment in the main appeal shall be delivered on 20. 11. 2025Orders accordingly.
RULING DATED AND SIGNED AT MOMBASA AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON THIS 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2025. ....................................Y. M. ANGIMAJUDGEIn the presence of:Gillian - Court assistantAppellant present in person.Ms. Christine Mukangi for 1st respondentNo appearance for 2nd-9th respondents.