[2023] KEELC 20796 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 20796 (KLR)

The court found that the issue of limitation was not raised during pretrial directions or at any of the several hearing dates, despite ample opportunity. Given that the matter had already been certified ready for hearing and further pretrial directions had been conducted to ensure all issues were addressed, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 20796 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Raphael Wanjohi Gikunju; Defendant: Jacinta Njeri t/a Munjethi Investments; Defendant: Gatundu Mang’u Farm Company Limited; Defendant: Kenya Urban Roads Authority
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 411 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (statute Bar)
Outcome
Application by 1st and 2nd defendants declined at this stage; issue to be raised during submissions.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Pretrial Procedure, Statute Bar, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Limitation of Actions Pretrial Procedure Statute Bar Land Disputes

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

Raphael Wanjohi Gikunju

Plaintiff

Jacinta Njeri t/a Munjethi Investments

Defendant

Gatundu Mang’u Farm Company Limited

Defendant

Kenya Urban Roads Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (statute Bar)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit is statute barred under the relevant limitation laws.
  2. 2 Whether the issue of limitation can be raised at this stage after pretrial directions and hearing dates have been set.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the issue of limitation was not raised during pretrial directions or at any of the several hearing dates, despite ample opportunity. Given that the matter had already been certified ready for hearing and further pretrial directions had been conducted to ensure all issues were addressed, the court exercised its discretion to decline hearing the preliminary objection at this stage. The court directed that the issue of limitation may instead be raised during submissions, rather than interrupting the scheduled hearing process.

Court Disposition

Application by 1st and 2nd defendants declined at this stage; issue to be raised during submissions.

Orders

  • The application by the 1st and 2nd defendants to have the suit declared statute barred is declined at this stage.
  • The issue of limitation may be raised during submissions.