[2019] KEHC 301 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 301 (KLR)

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear references arising from taxation of costs in Environment and Land Court matters. The applicant's failure to attach the relevant pleadings or application for taxation further undermined the application. As jurisdiction is fundamental and cannot be conferred by the parties,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 301 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Irene Samuel Odhiambo; Respondent: Angeline Onyango Ogutu
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Case 41 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time to File Reference to Taxation of Costs
Outcome
application dismissed for want of jurisdiction and procedural deficiencies
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Enlargement of Time, Taxation of Costs, Jurisdiction, Reference Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Enlargement of Time Taxation of Costs Jurisdiction Reference Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irene Samuel Odhiambo

Applicant

Angeline Onyango Ogutu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Enlargement of Time to File Reference to Taxation of Costs

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear a reference from taxation of costs in an Environment and Land Court case.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's failure to attach the relevant pleadings or application for taxation is fatal to the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear references arising from taxation of costs in Environment and Land Court matters. The applicant's failure to attach the relevant pleadings or application for taxation further undermined the application. As jurisdiction is fundamental and cannot be conferred by the parties, the application was misconceived and incompetent. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction and procedural deficiencies.

Court Disposition

application dismissed for want of jurisdiction and procedural deficiencies

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party to bear their own costs.