[2017] KEELC 3681 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 3681 (KLR)

The court found that the Defendant or his Attorney is entitled to be heard on his pending application, and that the absence of the court file should not bar him from accessing justice. Therefore, the court allowed the application for reconstruction of the file to enable the Defendant to file any application he deems...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 3681 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Geoffrey Mwangangi Kivala; Defendant: Aldo Gavarbi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 41 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Reconstruction of Court File
Outcome
Application allowed.
Judges
OA Angote
Legal Topics
Court File Reconstruction, Ex Parte Judgment, Vesting Order, Locus Standi
Source Language
en
Land and Property Court File Reconstruction Ex Parte Judgment Vesting Order Locus Standi

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geoffrey Mwangangi Kivala

Applicant

Aldo Gavarbi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application for Reconstruction of Court File

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an order for reconstruction of the missing court file.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant is entitled to be heard on his pending application despite the missing file.
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant has locus standi to oppose the application for reconstruction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Defendant or his Attorney is entitled to be heard on his pending application, and that the absence of the court file should not bar him from accessing justice. Therefore, the court allowed the application for reconstruction of the file to enable the Defendant to file any application he deems fit. The Applicant's objections regarding locus standi and utility were not persuasive in light of the Defendant's right to be heard.

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • The application dated 25th February 2016 is allowed in terms of prayers number 2 and 4.
  • The court file shall be reconstructed as per the annexures attached.