[2017] KEELC 20 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 20 (KLR)

The court found that the application for review or setting aside of the order was brought after an inordinate delay of thirteen years since the judgment was entered, and that no appeal had been filed in the intervening period. The court further noted that execution of the judgment had already been completed. In...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 20 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dr. Jacob Ngucie Mwangi; Defendant: Kadzeha Ngala
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 265 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Review or Setting Aside of Order
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
LC Komingoi
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Setting Aside Orders, Delay in Filing Applications
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Review of Court Orders Setting Aside Orders Delay in Filing Applications

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

Dr. Jacob Ngucie Mwangi

Plaintiff

Kadzeha Ngala

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Review or Setting Aside of Order

  1. 1 Whether the court should review, vary or set aside the ruling/order made on 20th July 2017.
  2. 2 Whether the application for review was brought without inordinate delay.
  3. 3 Whether reinstating the application dated 25/4/2017 would serve any meaningful purpose.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for review or setting aside of the order was brought after an inordinate delay of thirteen years since the judgment was entered, and that no appeal had been filed in the intervening period. The court further noted that execution of the judgment had already been completed. In these circumstances, the court held that reinstating the application would serve no meaningful purpose and that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient cause to warrant the exercise of the court's discretion in their favour. Accordingly, the application was dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 25/4/2017 is dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.