[2023] KEELC 17949 (KLR)
The court found that the reasons advanced by the defendants for adjournment were not plausible, particularly as the information was communicated to the plaintiff's counsel only a day before the scheduled hearing. No evidence was provided to show that the plaintiff had agreed to the adjournment. The court also noted...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 17949 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Idow Trading Company Limited; Defendant: Mohammed Jimale; Defendant: Osman Ali Mohammed; Defendant: City Council of Nairobi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 63 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
- Outcome
- Application for adjournment declined; matter to proceed.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment of Hearing, Expeditious Dispensation of Justice
- 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
Idow Trading Company Limited
Plaintiff
Mohammed Jimale
Defendant
Osman Ali Mohammed
Defendant
City Council of Nairobi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendants have provided sufficient grounds for adjournment of the hearing.
- 2 Whether the late notice to the plaintiff's counsel justifies an adjournment.
- 3 Whether repeated adjournments undermine the court's constitutional mandate for expeditious justice.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the reasons advanced by the defendants for adjournment were not plausible, particularly as the information was communicated to the plaintiff's counsel only a day before the scheduled hearing. No evidence was provided to show that the plaintiff had agreed to the adjournment. The court also noted that a previous adjournment had already been granted as a last opportunity due to the defence's unpreparedness. Emphasizing its constitutional duty to ensure expeditious justice, the court declined to grant a further adjournment and directed that the matter proceed in open court.
Court Disposition
Application for adjournment declined; matter to proceed.
Orders
- The application for adjournment is declined.
- The matter is to proceed in open court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Idow Trading Company Limited v Jimale & 2 others (Environment & Land Case 63 of 2008) [2023] KEELC 17949 (KLR) (7 June 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 17949 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 63 of 2008
LN Mbugua, J
June 7, 2023
Between
Idow Trading Company Limited
Plaintiff
and
Mohammed Jimale
1st Defendant
Osman Ali Mohammed
2nd Defendant
City Council of Nairobi
3rd Defendant
Ruling
1. I have perused the court file. I find that this is a very old case, filed in year 2008. The reasons being advanced by defendants on the prayer for adjournment is that Mr Macharia has a Court of Appeal matter case No E142 of 2021. However, no plausible reasons have been given as to why this information was being transmitted to plaintiff’s counsel just a day before the scheduled date of the trial (today).
2. Further, no evidence has been presented to this court by the 2nd & 3rd defendants to confirm that plaintiff’s side had agreed to have an adjournment.
3. I also note that on October 5, 2022, the court had granted a last adjournment as the defence was again not ready to proceed on that day.
4. This court has a constitutional mandate to ensure that justice is dispensed with expeditiously: see my decision in Lawrence Kinyua Mwai v Nyoriginu Farmers Co Ltd & another [2019] eKLR.
5. In the circumstances, the court declines to grant any adjournment. The matter is to proceed in open court. The court will give directions on the issue of documents in open court at 11. 00 am.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:Anzala for plaintiffPlaintiffsMugo holding brief for Mrs. Wambugu for 2nd defendant and holding brief for Macharia for 3rd Defendant.Macharia for 3rd Defendant