[2025] KEHC 2910 (KLR)
The court determined that the matter, although previously confirmed ready for hearing, was not in fact ready due to incomplete service of documents, specifically the CD and Certificate of Electronic Evidence, to all Defendants. The court found that proceeding with the hearing would prejudice the Defendants who had...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 2910 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Anthony Njehu Boro; Defendant: Royal Media Services Limited; Defendant: Mashirima Kapombe; Defendant: Steve Shitera; Defendant: Margaret Kirungari Karanja; Defendant: Christopher Ndungu Karanja Alias Kris Karanja
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 40 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Pre Trial Directions and Adjournment Ruling
- Outcome
- Hearing adjourned; directions issued for pre-trial compliance and service of documents.
- Judges
- DO Chepkwony
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment of Hearing, Service of Documents, Pre Trial Compliance
- 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
Anthony Njehu Boro
Plaintiff
Royal Media Services Limited
Defendant
Mashirima Kapombe
Defendant
Steve Shitera
Defendant
Margaret Kirungari Karanja
Defendant
Christopher Ndungu Karanja Alias Kris Karanja
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Pre Trial Directions and Adjournment Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the hearing should proceed when not all parties have been served with relevant documents and electronic evidence.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff should be granted an adjournment to call additional witnesses and serve outstanding documents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that the matter, although previously confirmed ready for hearing, was not in fact ready due to incomplete service of documents, specifically the CD and Certificate of Electronic Evidence, to all Defendants. The court found that proceeding with the hearing would prejudice the Defendants who had not received all relevant documents. The Plaintiff's indication of intent to seek an adjournment to call further witnesses further supported the need for adjournment. The court therefore adjourned the hearing and issued directions for completion of pre-trial compliance, including service of all outstanding documents and provision for the Defendants to respond.
Court Disposition
Hearing adjourned; directions issued for pre-trial compliance and service of documents.
Orders
- The parties to complete and confirm compliance of pre-trial directions.
- The Plaintiff to serve all the other documents upon the Defendants within 7 days from the date hereof.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
Boro v Royal Media Services Limited & 4 others (Civil Case 40 of 2018) [2025] KEHC 2910 (KLR) (31 January 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 2910 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kiambu
Civil Case 40 of 2018
DO Chepkwony, J
January 31, 2025
Between
Anthony Njehu Boro
Plaintiff
and
Royal Media Services Limited
1st Defendant
Mashirima Kapombe
2nd Defendant
Steve Shitera
3rd Defendant
Margaret Kirungari Karanja
4th Defendant
Christopher Ndungu Karanja Alias Kris Karanja
5th Defendant
Ruling
1. This matter was scheduled for hearing of the main suit. However, upon listening to all counsel for the parties, it has clearly come out that the Plaintiff’s counsel has only availed one witness and intends to seek for an adjournment to call the other witnesses in support of his case.
2. M/S Muhoro counsel for the 5th and 6th Defendants, although ready to proceed with one witness, pointed out that she has come across a CD and is wondering if the Plaintiff intends to plat it for evidence as they had not been served with it. Counsel for the Plaintiff responded by pointing out that the had filed and served the recording and Certificate of Electronic Evidence which is attached as the Plaintiff’s further list of documents dated 5th May, 2022, at which time the current counsel for 5th and 6th Defendants had not come on record. Counsel for the 1st to 4th Defendants confirmed having received all the witnesses statements, the list and bundle of documents including the clip save for the Certificate of Electronic Evidence.
3. In regard to these submissions by the counsel for the parties herein, it is clear that even if we were to proceed and hear the Plaintiff’s one witness, the Plaintiff’s counsel has put the court on notice that they will be applying for an adjournment to enable them avail the other witnesses.
4. Also, although the matter is scheduled for hearing, the same having been confirmed ready on account of compliance with Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules, it has come out that counsel for 5th and 6th Defendants has not been served with a CD and Certificate of Electronic Evidence while counsel for the 1st to 4th Defendants confirms that he has not been served with the Certificate of Electronic Evidence.
5. I have perused the record and established that the Plaintiff further list of documents dated 5th May, 2022 shows that the Report Plaintiff filed Government Analyst Report dated 25th September, 2018, and a copy of Citizen TV Video recording of 11th September 2018 at 1. 00pm.
6. In view of this, it is evident that the matter was confirmed ready for hearing, and yet it was not. The record also shows that counsel for the 5th and 6th Defendants came on record on 18th October, 2022 as per the Notice of Change of Advocates which is way after the further list of documents had been filed.
7. That being so, the hearing is adjourned with the following directions:-a.The parties to complete and confirm compliance of pre-trial directions.b.The Plaintiff to serve all the other documents upon the Defendants within 7 days from the date hereof.c.The Defendants be at liberty to file and serve any documents in response within 7 days of being served by the Plaintiff.d.Hearing is adjourned to 23rd April, 2025. It is so ordered.
RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025. D. O. CHEPKWONYJUDGEIn the presence of:-Mr. Mokire holding brief for Mr. Kabaiko counsel for PlaintiffMr. Munyori counsel for 1st – 4th DefendantsM/S Muhoro counsel for 5th and 6th DefendantsPlaintiff – presentCourt Assistant - Martin