[2018] KEELC 1288 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 1288 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant's explanation for his counsel's absence was bona fide, as the matter was listed before both the court and the Deputy Registrar on the same day, which was not brought to the court's attention at the time of disposing of the plaintiff's application. The plaintiff did not controvert...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 1288 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: James Oduor Wanyande; Defendant: Maurice Oduor Ombiro
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 224 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Orders
Outcome
Application allowed; ex parte orders set aside.
Judges
BM Eboso
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders, Right to Be Heard, Contempt of Court, Court Listing Errors
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders Right to Be Heard Contempt of Court Court Listing Errors

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Oduor Wanyande

Plaintiff

Maurice Oduor Ombiro

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Orders

  1. 1 Whether the ex parte orders issued on 22/3/2018 should be set aside due to the defendant's counsel's absence.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was denied the right to be heard on the plaintiff's application dated 10/1/2018.
  3. 3 Whether the listing of the matter before both the court and the Deputy Registrar caused procedural unfairness.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's explanation for his counsel's absence was bona fide, as the matter was listed before both the court and the Deputy Registrar on the same day, which was not brought to the court's attention at the time of disposing of the plaintiff's application. The plaintiff did not controvert this fact nor provide the relevant causelist. In the interests of justice and to uphold the right to be heard, the court exercised its discretion to set aside the ex parte orders made on 22/3/2018. Directions regarding the plaintiff's notice of motion would be given in open court, and there would be no order as to costs for the application.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; ex parte orders set aside.

Orders

  • The ex parte orders made on 22/3/2018 are set aside.
  • Directions on the plaintiff's notice of motion dated 10/1/2018 to be given in open court.