[2024] KEELC 4454 (KLR)
The court held that under Section 147 of the Evidence Act, it is permissible for a person in possession of a document, such as a clerk from the Business Office of Registration, to produce it in court without being the author or a witness to its creation. The documents in question are public documents, and their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 4454 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Continental Credit Finance Limited (In Liquidation); Defendant: Isaac Gathungu Wanjohi; Defendant: Igainya Limited; Defendant: Principal Registrar Of Titles
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 339 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Objection to Production of Documents
- Outcome
- objection overruled; documents admitted
- Judges
- JA Mogeni
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Evidence, Production of Documents, Public Documents, Business Registration Records
- 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
Continental Credit Finance Limited (In Liquidation)
Plaintiff
Isaac Gathungu Wanjohi
Defendant
Igainya Limited
Defendant
Principal Registrar Of Titles
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Objection to Production of Documents
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether documents produced by a clerk from the Business Office of Registration can be admitted without calling the author as a witness.
- 2 Whether Section 147 of the Evidence Act permits production of documents by a non-author.
- 3 Whether the defendants will suffer prejudice if the documents are admitted without cross-examining the author.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that under Section 147 of the Evidence Act, it is permissible for a person in possession of a document, such as a clerk from the Business Office of Registration, to produce it in court without being the author or a witness to its creation. The documents in question are public documents, and their authenticity or the authority of their publication was not in dispute before the court. The court found no prejudice to the defendants, as the documents are publicly available and the defendants had the opportunity to file supplementary documents but did not. Therefore, the objection to their production was overruled, and the documents were admitted as prayed.
Court Disposition
objection overruled; documents admitted
Orders
- The objection to the production of documents is overruled.
- The plaintiff is allowed to produce the supplementary documents as prayed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Continental Credit Finance Limited (In Liquidation) v Wanjohi & 2 others (Environment & Land Case 339 of 2011) [2024] KEELC 4454 (KLR) (3 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 4454 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 339 of 2011
JA Mogeni, J
June 3, 2024
Between
Continental Credit Finance Limited (In Liquidation)
Plaintiff
and
Isaac Gathungu Wanjohi
1st Defendant
Igainya Limited
2nd Defendant
Principal Registrar Of Titles
3rd Defendant
Ruling
1. The Plaintiff has sought to produce the documents referred to above which have been produced by a clerk from the Business Office of Registration. The defendant has objected to the production seeking to have the author of the said documents to be the one producing the said documents. In their response the Plaintiff’s counsel has referred the court to Section 147 of the Evidence Act which allows a person to be summoned to produce documents without necessarily being a witness.
2. The court has noted that leave was granted to the Plaintiff to produce the supplementary list containing the said documents. The defendant was granted corresponding leave to file any supplementary documents if need be. From the record the defendant seems to have had no other documents to file. The defendant has alleged that they will not have a chance to cross-examine the producer of the supplementary documents if they are not the authors.
3. In line with Section 147 of the Evidence Act, I do not see what prejudice the defendant will suffer if the said documents are produced since they are public documents which are already available for any one to refer to and we need not summon the one who authorized publication unless the issue of authorization is before the court which is not neither is the issue of entry of records in the Business Registration Register nor the Index Register contested before the court. the clerk who makes the entry can be called to produce the documents. I therefore overrule the objection and allow the production as prayed
HON MOGENI J.JUDGE3/06/2024RULING FOR ELC 339 OF 2011 0