[2017] KEELC 1461 (KLR)
The court found that while it has the discretion to allow the reopening of a case in the interests of justice, such discretion must be exercised judiciously and with regard to potential prejudice to other parties. In this instance, the court determined that the evidence the plaintiff sought to adduce would be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 1461 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Jackson Kiprotich Kibor; Defendant: Kipruto Arap Lelei; Defendant: Samuel Kiprono Somoei; Defendant: Tanguar Arap Suge; Defendant: Serei Arap Lel Nengit; Defendant: Chelule Keino; Defendant: Wesley Kimeli Sambai; Defendant: Wilson Kipkering Kogo; Defendant: Kiprotich Arap Kibiwott; Defendant: Gedion Kipruto Chemiron; Defendant: The Attorney General; Defendant: Elkana Kipleting Kibor; Defendant: Evans Kipkosgei Kibor; Defendant: Ezekiel Kipng’etich Kibor; Defendant: Erick Kipchumba Kibor; Defendant: Raymond Kibitok Kibor; Defendant: Kesenche “B”; Defendant: Kesenche “A”; Defendant: Edwin Kipkoech Kibor; Defendant: The Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: Uasin Gishu County
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 94 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Land Case / Ruling on Application to Reopen Plaintiff's Case to Adduce Additional Evidence
- Outcome
- application to reopen plaintiff's case dismissed; case to proceed to defence hearing
- Judges
- A Ombwayo
- Legal Topics
- Reopening of Case, Adduction of Evidence, Judicial Discretion, Land Title Documents
- 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
Jackson Kiprotich Kibor
Plaintiff
Kipruto Arap Lelei
Defendant
Samuel Kiprono Somoei
Defendant
Tanguar Arap Suge
Defendant
Serei Arap Lel Nengit
Defendant
Chelule Keino
Defendant
Wesley Kimeli Sambai
Defendant
Wilson Kipkering Kogo
Defendant
Kiprotich Arap Kibiwott
Defendant
Gedion Kipruto Chemiron
Defendant
The Attorney General
Defendant
Elkana Kipleting Kibor
Defendant
Evans Kipkosgei Kibor
Defendant
Ezekiel Kipng’etich Kibor
Defendant
Erick Kipchumba Kibor
Defendant
Raymond Kibitok Kibor
Defendant
Kesenche “B”
Defendant
Kesenche “A”
Defendant
Edwin Kipkoech Kibor
Defendant
The Chief Land Registrar
Defendant
Uasin Gishu County
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Application to Reopen Plaintiff's Case to Adduce Additional Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to reopen his case to adduce additional evidence and produce further exhibits.
- 2 Whether the reopening of the plaintiff's case would prejudice the defendants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that while it has the discretion to allow the reopening of a case in the interests of justice, such discretion must be exercised judiciously and with regard to potential prejudice to other parties. In this instance, the court determined that the evidence the plaintiff sought to adduce would be produced by the Chief Land Registrar and the County Land Registrar, who have the authority and obligation to provide all relevant documents in their possession regarding the suit. Therefore, it was unnecessary to reopen the plaintiff's case. The court further noted that the defendants opposing the application had not demonstrated any prejudice that would result from reopening the...
Court Disposition
application to reopen plaintiff's case dismissed; case to proceed to defence hearing
Orders
- The application to reopen the plaintiff's case is dismissed.
- The case shall proceed with the defence hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
36 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
E & L CASE NO. 94 OF 2016
JACKSON KIPROTICH KIBOR………………….…..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
KIPRUTO ARAP LELEI……………………….1ST DEFENDANT
SAMUEL KIPRONO SOMOEI……………….2ND DEFENDANT
TANGUAR ARAP SUGE……………………...3RD DEFENDANT
SEREI ARAP LEL NENGIT…………………....4TH DEFENDANT
CHELULE KEINO……………………………...5TH DEFENDANT
WESLEY KIMELI SAMBAI…………………...6TH DEFENDANT
WILSON KIPKERING KOGO…………………7TH DEFENDANT
KIPROTICH ARAP KIBIWOTT……………….8TH DEFENDANT
GEDION KIPRUTO CHEMIRON………………9TH DEFENDANT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL…………………10TH DEFENDANT
ELKANA KIPLETING KIBOR………………...11TH DEFENDANT
EVANS KIPKOSGEI KIBOR…………………12TH DEFENDANT
EZEKIEL KIPNG’ETICH KIBOR……………..13TH DEFENDANT
ERICK KIPCHUMBA KIBOR………………...14TH DEFENDANT
RAYMOND KIBITOK KIBOR………………...15TH DEFENDANT
KESENCHE “B”……………………………...16TH DEFENDANT
KESENCHE “A”……………………………...17TH DEFENDANT
EDWIN KIPKOECH KIBOR………………….18TH DEFENDANT
THE CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR……………..19TH DEFENDANT
UASIN GISHU COUNTY………………….….20TH DEFENDANT
RULING
The application before court is dated 24th day of April, 2017. The applicant prays for leave to reopen his case and to adduce additional evidence and produce as exhibits aspects that are vital and fundamental to his case and helpful to the court’s cause of justice. He prays that he be cross examined by all parties and participants at their liberty on the new evidence and exhibits. The application is based on grounds that he requires to adduce evidence in respect of the searches on the parcels of land claimed by the 1st to 9th and 11th to 18th defendants, which searches he claims to be very relevant to his case. He also seeks to produce the premised title. He further states that the 10th, 19th and 20th defendants have not made their statements making it difficult for the plaintiff to place their case in picture.
Elkana Kipleting Kibor, the 11th defendant filed a replying affidavit on his behalf and on behalf of the 12th and 14th defendants. He argues that the documents sought to be produced were filed as the list of documents hence there is no need for reinduction. He states that the plaintiff disowned the documents and therefore, he should not be allowed to approbate and reprobate.
The application was opposed by the 11th, 12th and 14th defendants. The rest did not oppose.
The gravamen of submissions by Mr. Songok, learned counsel for the plaintiff is that the plaintiff contemplated that the defendants would put in some documents which are very important, however, the plaintiff has come to realize that the defendants are not likely to put in the said documents which will assist the court to make an informal decision.
M/s Adhiambo, learned counsel for 11th, 12th and 14th defendants argue that the application is an abuse of court process as this is the second time the applicant is seeking to re-open the case. She argues that there are no valid reasons why the documents were not produced.
I have considered the application and the rival submissions and do find that this court has unfettered discretion to either allow or disallow the re-opening of a case. It should consider the issue in the interest of justice and it is important for the court to make an informed decision. The court should in any event not deny a party from the seat of justice and the only way a party can approach the seat of justice is by presenting evidence. The court should also consider the issue of prejudice, thus the order for re-opening should not be prejudiced to the other parties. I have considered the replying affidavit and do find that the 11th, 12th and 14th defendants have not demonstrated to this court how re-opening of the plaintiff case would prejudice the defendants’ case.
However, I do find that the evidence sought to be adduced will be adduced by the Chief Land Registrar and the County Land Registrar and therefore, it is not necessary to re-open the plaintiff’s case. This court has the power to call the Chief Land Registrar and the County Land Registrar to produce all documents in their possession in respect of the suit herein. I do order that the case proceeds with defence hearing.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017.
A. OMBWAYO
JUDGE