[2017] KECA 40 (KLR)

[2017] KECA 40 (KLR)

The court determined that the applicant had not had sufficient time to respond to the affidavits and grounds of opposition served by the respondents and interested parties, and that the 1st respondent's counsel had also only just been served with the hearing notice. In the interests of justice and fairness, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KECA 40 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: The County Government of Bomet; Respondent: Moi University; Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: The Chief Land Registrar; Interested Party: Hon Prof. Wilfred Lessan, Hon Stephen Mutai, Hon Cecilia Ngetich, Hon Dr. Joyce Laboso, Hon Sammy Koesh, Hon Bernard Bett and Hon Ronald Tonui
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Application 65 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
adjourned with leave to file replying affidavits
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Record of Appeal, Service of Affidavits
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Record of Appeal Service of Affidavits

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

The County Government of Bomet

Applicant

Moi University

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

The Chief Land Registrar

Respondent

Hon Prof. Wilfred Lessan, Hon Stephen Mutai, Hon Cecilia Ngetich, Hon Dr. Joyce Laboso, Hon Sammy Koesh, Hon Bernard Bett and Hon Ronald Tonui

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file a replying affidavit to the affidavits served by the respondents and interested parties.
  2. 2 Whether the hearing of the Notice of Motion should be adjourned to allow parties to respond adequately.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the applicant had not had sufficient time to respond to the affidavits and grounds of opposition served by the respondents and interested parties, and that the 1st respondent's counsel had also only just been served with the hearing notice. In the interests of justice and fairness, the court exercised its discretion to grant the applicant leave to file and serve replying affidavits within 14 days of service. The court also noted that the related application (No. 76/2017) was a matter for a full bench and would be dealt with separately. The hearing of the current Notice of Motion was therefore adjourned to allow parties to adequately prepare and respond.

Court Disposition

adjourned with leave to file replying affidavits

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicant to file and serve replying affidavits within 14 days of service of the replying affidavits by the respondents and interested parties.
  • The hearing of the Notice of Motion is adjourned; a new hearing date shall be given.