[2010] KEHC 1900 (KLR)
The court found that the Respondent had failed to take any action to prosecute the substantive motion for over two years since it was last in court, and had not filed any reply or attended the hearing of the application to dismiss. This conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the case and an intention to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1900 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Chepkerio Chelal; Respondent: Baringo Land Disputes Tribunal & Another
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review 19 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Substantive motion dismissed for want of prosecution. All interim orders lifted.
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Interim Orders, Delay in Prosecution, Land 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
Chepkerio Chelal
Applicant
Baringo Land Disputes Tribunal & Another
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the substantive motion filed by the Respondent should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
- 2 Whether the interim orders previously granted to the Respondent should be lifted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Respondent had failed to take any action to prosecute the substantive motion for over two years since it was last in court, and had not filed any reply or attended the hearing of the application to dismiss. This conduct demonstrated a lack of interest in pursuing the case and an intention to benefit from interim orders at the expense of the Applicant. The court held that such indolence warranted dismissal of the substantive motion for want of prosecution and the lifting of all interim orders previously granted.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Substantive motion dismissed for want of prosecution. All interim orders lifted.
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 6th August 2007 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- All orders previously granted in favour of the Respondent are lifted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT ELDORET
Judicial Review 19 of 2009
CHEPKERIO CHELAL:……………….....................……...........................……APPLICANT
AND
BARINGO LAND DISPUTES TRIBUNAL & ANOTHER……………..……RESPONDENT
RULING
The Applicant prays that the substantive Motion taken out by the Respondents on 16th August 2007 under a certificate of urgency be dismissed for want of prosecution. The grounds are that the matter was last in court on 13th May 2009 when it was marked as stood over generally and since then the Respondent has not taken any action to set it down for hearing. That all the Respondent required was a stay of proceedings and since obtaining the same has become indolent and has shown no interest in prosecuting the same.
The affidavit in support sworn by the Applicant reiterates the grounds above only adding that the interim orders obtained by the Respondent operate adversely to the Applicant and he stands to suffer extreme prejudice as he cannot execute orders granted earlier in his favour.
The firm of Tarus & Company Advocates on record for the Respondent though served did not attend court on the date this application was set to be heard.
The court records show that the substantive motion was set down to be heard on 13. 05. 2009. On that date none of the parties herein attended court and the court marked the matter as stood over generally. Between that date and 16/02/2010 when this application was filed no action has been taken by the Respondent to have the application heard. No reply to the application was filed by the Respondent and as stated above there was no attendance at the hearing by the Respondent or his duly appointed advocate. Such can only be deemed as the actions of a party who has lost interest in the case he filed and is content with an interim order that he has enjoyed for a period in excess of two (2) years. I am satisfied that this application is merited and accordingly the Notice of Motion dated 6th August 2007 is dismissed for want of prosecution and all orders previously granted are lifted.
Orders accordingly.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2010.
P.M.MWILU
JUDGE
IN THE PRESENCE OF
Advocate for
Gumbo H/B Kiptuny - Interested party/Applicant
Andrew Omwenga - Court clerk.
P.M.MWILU
JUDGE