[2021] KEELC 4539 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 4539 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's failure to attend court was inadvertent and excusable, and that the application to review and set aside the dismissal order was unopposed. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application and reinstate the dismissed application, finding no prejudice to the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 4539 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Esther Mpandi Muchena (suing as administrator of the estate of Amos Muchena M’Arimi (deceased)); Respondent: Nkando Farmers Cooperative Society Limited; Respondent: Thomas Kinoti
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 12 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review and Set Aside Dismissal Order
Outcome
Application allowed; previous dismissal order set aside; application reinstated.
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Review of Court Orders Reinstatement of Suit Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esther Mpandi Muchena (suing as administrator of the estate of Amos Muchena M’Arimi (deceased))

Applicant

Nkando Farmers Cooperative Society Limited

Respondent

Thomas Kinoti

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Review and Set Aside Dismissal Order

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient cause to warrant review and setting aside of the dismissal order for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether the failure of the applicant's advocate to attend court was excusable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's failure to attend court was inadvertent and excusable, and that the application to review and set aside the dismissal order was unopposed. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to allow the application and reinstate the dismissed application, finding no prejudice to the respondents and no reason to deny the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; previous dismissal order set aside; application reinstated.

Orders

  • The application dated 13.2.2020 is allowed.
  • The orders of 10.2.2020 dismissing the application dated 23.1.2020 for want of prosecution are set aside.