[2018] KEELC 3497 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3497 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to demonstrate reasonable cause for the inactivity in prosecuting the suit for over a year following the ruling delivered on 22nd June 2016. The hospital records provided by the Plaintiff only accounted for a two-week period of incapacity in February 2017, which did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3497 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Chispine Onyango Otieno; Defendant: Thomas Francis Ouma Otieno; Defendant: John Owino Otieno
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 41 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Order 17 Rule 2 Civil Procedure Rules, Land Dispute, Reasonable Cause Requirement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Reinstatement of Suit Order 17 Rule 2 Civil Procedure Rules Land Dispute Reasonable Cause Requirement

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

Chispine Onyango Otieno

Plaintiff

Thomas Francis Ouma Otieno

Defendant

John Owino Otieno

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff has shown reasonable cause why his suit should not have been dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff failed to demonstrate reasonable cause for the inactivity in prosecuting the suit for over a year following the ruling delivered on 22nd June 2016. The hospital records provided by the Plaintiff only accounted for a two-week period of incapacity in February 2017, which did not explain the prolonged inactivity from June 2016 to July 2017. The Plaintiff's claim of arriving late to court on the date of the notice to show cause was unsupported by any evidence on record. Consequently, the court held that the Plaintiff had not met the threshold for setting aside the dismissal and reinstating the suit. The application was therefore dismissed with costs to the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's notice of motion dated 30th October 2017 is dismissed with costs.