[2020] KEELC 371 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 371 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff had not closed her evidence and had been stood down to produce original documents. Given the centrality of Nairobi City County's records to the ownership dispute and the consolidation of the suits, it was necessary for the Plaintiff to be recalled for further cross-examination on...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 371 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Grace Akinyi Ngoge; Defendant: John Abuya Isanda; Defendant: Mary Njoki Fundi; Defendant: Nairobi City County
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 6 & 99 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Court Suit / Ruling on Oral Application to Recall Plaintiff for Further Cross Examination and Admission of Documents
Outcome
Application allowed.
Judges
EO Obaga
Legal Topics
Recall of Witness, Admissibility of Documents, Consolidation of Suits, Ownership Dispute
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Recall of Witness Admissibility of Documents Consolidation of Suits Ownership Dispute

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grace Akinyi Ngoge

Plaintiff

John Abuya Isanda

Defendant

Mary Njoki Fundi

Defendant

Nairobi City County

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Court Suit / Ruling on Oral Application to Recall Plaintiff for Further Cross Examination and Admission of Documents

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff should be recalled for further cross-examination by the Defendant in the consolidated suit.
  2. 2 Whether documents filed by the Defendant should be admitted into evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff had not closed her evidence and had been stood down to produce original documents. Given the centrality of Nairobi City County's records to the ownership dispute and the consolidation of the suits, it was necessary for the Plaintiff to be recalled for further cross-examination on the documents filed by the Defendant. The court held that no prejudice would be suffered by the Plaintiff, as her counsel would have the opportunity to re-examine her on any new issues. The court also determined that a formal application for recalling the witness was unnecessary in the circumstances. In the interest of justice and to ensure a fair determination of the dispute,...

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff shall be recalled for further cross-examination by the Defendant in ELC 6 of 2016.
  • The documents and witness statement filed by Nairobi City County are deemed properly filed and are admitted as part of the record.