[2025] KEHC 6162 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 6162 (KLR)

The court granted the Plaintiff's request for adjournment due to a technical hitch, noting that the Defendants did not object but sought compensation for costs incurred. The court exercised its discretion to allow the adjournment on the condition that the Plaintiff pays the Defendants' counsel costs for attending...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 6162 (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 / Adjournment Ruling Prior to Hearing of Main Suit
Outcome
Adjournment granted with costs to the Defendants and new hearing dates set.
Judges
DO Chepkwony
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Hearing, Costs Award, Court Fees, Witness Expenses
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Adjournment of Hearing Costs Award Court Fees Witness Expenses

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

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 / Adjournment Ruling Prior to Hearing of Main Suit

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to an adjournment of the hearing of the main suit.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants are entitled to costs and expenses occasioned by the adjournment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the Plaintiff's request for adjournment due to a technical hitch, noting that the Defendants did not object but sought compensation for costs incurred. The court exercised its discretion to allow the adjournment on the condition that the Plaintiff pays the Defendants' counsel costs for attending court, as well as travelling and subsistence costs for their witnesses. The court further ordered the Plaintiff to pay the court's adjournment fees and fixed new hearing dates. The orders were made to balance the Plaintiff's right to a fair hearing with the Defendants' entitlement to compensation for inconvenience and expenses caused by the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Adjournment granted with costs to the Defendants and new hearing dates set.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay Defendants' counsel costs for attending court on the adjourned date.
  • Plaintiff to pay travelling and subsistence costs for Defendants' witnesses who attended court.