[2022] KEELC 3397 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 3397 (KLR)

The court held that although the respondent argued the application for transfer had been overtaken by events due to administrative movement of files, leaving the application unresolved would contribute to further delay and uncertainty in the hearing of the suit. The court found it necessary for the application to be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 3397 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mary Game; Respondent: County Government of Marsabit; Respondent: National Land Commission; Respondent: Galgalo Barile; Respondent: Boku Gufu; Respondent: Habiba Bokayo; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Isiolo
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Case Civil Suit E001 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit
Outcome
Directions issued for parties to file and serve written submissions on the application for transfer; matter to be mentioned for directions.
Judges
PM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Transfer of Suit, Jurisdiction, Expeditious Hearing
Source Language
en
Land and Property Transfer of Suit Jurisdiction Expeditious Hearing

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

Mary Game

Appellant

County Government of Marsabit

Respondent

National Land Commission

Respondent

Galgalo Barile

Respondent

Boku Gufu

Respondent

Habiba Bokayo

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for transfer of the suit from the Magistrate's Court at Meru to the Isiolo ELC Court should be allowed.
  2. 2 Whether the matter has been overtaken by events due to administrative transfer of files.
  3. 3 Whether leaving the application unresolved would delay expeditious hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that although the respondent argued the application for transfer had been overtaken by events due to administrative movement of files, leaving the application unresolved would contribute to further delay and uncertainty in the hearing of the suit. The court found it necessary for the application to be canvassed by the parties to ensure that the matter is properly before the correct court and to promote expeditious disposal. Accordingly, the court issued directions for the filing and exchange of written submissions and set a date for further directions.

Court Disposition

Directions issued for parties to file and serve written submissions on the application for transfer; matter to be mentioned for directions.

Orders

  • The applicant is directed to file and serve written submissions within 21 days of the ruling date.
  • The respondent is to file and serve written submissions within 21 days after receipt of the applicant’s submissions.