[2022] KEELC 1998 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 1998 (KLR)

The court found that the parties, through their respective counsel, had agreed to settle the appeal out of court and sought time to file a consent. In line with the constitutional imperative to promote alternative dispute resolution and to avoid delay of justice, the court exercised its discretion to allow the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 1998 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Benard Otieno Obunga; Respondent: Lawrence Oguda Obunga
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal 31 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Elc Appeal / Ruling on Request to Record Consent and Stay Judgment Pending ADR
Outcome
Application to allow time for filing consent on out-of-court settlement is allowed; judgment held in abeyance.
Legal Topics
Consent Orders, Settlement Out of Court, Judicial Discretion, Adr Promotion
Source Language
en
Land and Property Alternative Dispute Resolution Consent Orders Settlement Out of Court Judicial Discretion Adr Promotion

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benard Otieno Obunga

Appellant

Lawrence Oguda Obunga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Elc Appeal / Ruling on Request to Record Consent and Stay Judgment Pending ADR

  1. 1 Whether the court should allow parties time to file a consent for out-of-court settlement of the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether judgment should be held in abeyance pending confirmation of alternative dispute resolution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the parties, through their respective counsel, had agreed to settle the appeal out of court and sought time to file a consent. In line with the constitutional imperative to promote alternative dispute resolution and to avoid delay of justice, the court exercised its discretion to allow the parties time to formalize their settlement. The court relied on Article 159(2)(b) and (c) of the Constitution and Section 20 of the Environment and Land Court Act, emphasizing that litigants and their counsel are best placed to determine their affairs. Accordingly, the court allowed the application, held judgment in abeyance, and fixed a mention date to confirm the application of ADR.

Court Disposition

Application to allow time for filing consent on out-of-court settlement is allowed; judgment held in abeyance.

Orders

  • Application by the appellant's counsel is allowed.
  • Appeal fixed for mention on 2nd February 2022 to confirm application of ADR.