[2024] KEELC 4475 (KLR)
The court held that while procedural rules generally prohibit the production of documents for the first time during re-examination, the overriding objective of the court is to do substantive justice. The witness had referred to the documents, and their exclusion on a mere technicality would defeat the ends of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 4475 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Gori Investments Limited; Defendant: Basco Products (K) Limited; Defendant: David Gichohi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 1528 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Documents at Re Examination Stage
- Outcome
- Application to produce documents at re-examination stage allowed.
- Judges
- JA Mogeni
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Evidence, Re Examination, Expert Witness Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gori Investments Limited
Plaintiff
Basco Products (K) Limited
Defendant
David Gichohi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Documents at Re Examination Stage
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether documents can be produced at the re-examination stage after being referred to by an expert witness but not produced earlier.
- 2 Whether technicalities should prevent the production of evidence necessary for justice.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that while procedural rules generally prohibit the production of documents for the first time during re-examination, the overriding objective of the court is to do substantive justice. The witness had referred to the documents, and their exclusion on a mere technicality would defeat the ends of justice. Relying on Article 159(2) of the Constitution, the court allowed the documents to be produced and granted the opposing counsel the right to cross-examine the witness on the newly produced documents. This approach ensures fairness to both parties and upholds the constitutional mandate to eschew undue technicalities in the administration of justice.
Court Disposition
Application to produce documents at re-examination stage allowed.
Orders
- The documents referred to by the witness are admitted into evidence.
- Plaintiff's counsel is permitted to cross-examine the witness on the newly produced documents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
Gori Investments Limited v Basco Products (K) Limited & another (Environment & Land Case 1528 of 2016) [2024] KEELC 4475 (KLR) (29 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 4475 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 1528 of 2016
JA Mogeni, J
May 29, 2024
Between
Gori Investments Limited
Plaintiff
and
Basco Products (K) Limited
1st Defendant
David Gichohi
2nd Defendant
Ruling
1. The application to produce documents at this point of re-examination is opposed. The defendant’s counsel argues that the documents are from an expert witness. I note that one can indeed not produce documents at re-examination stage, the witness referred to them but failed to produce them. This is a technicality and in order to advance the objects of justice without paying due regard to technicality. I will seek refuge in Article in 159(2) and allow the documents to be produced and also allow the Plaintiff’s counsel to cross-examine the witness if he so wishes.
HON. MOGENI J.JUDGE29/05/2024