[2023] KEELC 20921 (KLR)
The court found that the application to bar Mr. Willis Otieno from making oral submissions for the respondent lacked merit. The respondent is entitled to legal representation by counsel of his choice, and both Mr. Otieno and Ms. Obwanda were properly appearing for the respondent. The procedural argument regarding...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 20921 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jane Jecton alias Jennifer Odoyo Olando; Appellant: Maurice Odoyo; Appellant: Wycliffe Odoyo; Appellant: Hassan Odoyo; Respondent: Nixon Otieno Bugo
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application to Bar Advocate From Oral Submissions
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Right of Audience, Representation by Counsel, Notice of Appointment, Oral Submissions, Court Discretion
- 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
Jane Jecton alias Jennifer Odoyo Olando
Appellant
Maurice Odoyo
Appellant
Wycliffe Odoyo
Appellant
Hassan Odoyo
Appellant
Nixon Otieno Bugo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application to Bar Advocate From Oral Submissions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Mr. Willis Otieno, advocate, should be barred from making oral submissions for the respondent on grounds that he is not formally on record.
- 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to legal representation of his choice in the appeal proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to bar Mr. Willis Otieno from making oral submissions for the respondent lacked merit. The respondent is entitled to legal representation by counsel of his choice, and both Mr. Otieno and Ms. Obwanda were properly appearing for the respondent. The procedural argument regarding notice of appointment was not sufficient to deny the respondent the right to be represented, especially where there was no prejudice to the appellants and the respondent's counsel had always acted on instructions. The court relied on constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right to legal representation and on statutory provisions and case law emphasizing substantive justice...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to bar Mr. Willis Otieno from making oral submissions for the respondent is disallowed.
- All three counsel are granted five minutes each to orally submit in the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Jecton alias Jennifer Odoyo Olando & 3 others v Bugo (Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2021) [2023] KEELC 20921 (KLR) (23 October 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 20921 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Environment and Land Appeal E010 of 2021
GMA Ongondo, J
October 23, 2023
Between
Jane Jecton aias Jennifer Odoyo Olando
1st Appellant
Maurice Odoyo
2nd Appellant
Wycliffe Odoyo
3rd Appellant
Hassan Odoyo
4th Appellant
and
Nixon Otieno Bugo
Respondent
(Being an appeal against the Judgment of the Principal Magistrate’s court at Ndhiwa delivered by Hon. Mary A. Ochieng’ on the 28th day of September 2021 in Environment and Land Court Suit Number 22 of 2020)
Ruling
1. I have duly considered an application by Ms. B. Ochieng holding brief for Obach learned counsel for the appellants to the effect that Mr. Willis Otieno be barred from oral submission for the respondent. That the said counsel is not on record herein.
2. Further, I have heard Mr. Willis Otieno Advocate who has told the court that he is appearing alongside Ms. L.K Obwanda learned counsel for the respondent. That it was not necessary for him to file another notice of appointment of advocate. That the respondent cannot be prevented from presenting oral submission for the respondent who is entitled to counsel of his own choice. That if he is presented from the respondent’s submissions, it would be prejudicial to the respondent.
3. Ms. Obwanda for the respondent has stated that she is appearing alongside Mr. Willis Otieno for the respondent. That she has always received instructions from the said counsel who is also representing the respondent.
4. Upon hearing counsel B. Ochieng, L.K Obwanda and Willis Otieno for their respective clients who are parties in this appeal and in view of sections 3 and 19 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015 (2011), section 1A, 1B, 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act Chapter 21 Laws of Kenya as well as the Court of Appeal decision in James Kanyiita Nderitu and another -versus Marios Philotas Ghikas and another (2016)eKLR and Articles 25(c), 48 and 50(1) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, I find the application of the appellants’ Advocate devoid of merit.
5. So, the application is hereby disallowed.
6. The three (3) counsel are granted five (5) minutes each to orally submit in this appeal.
7. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED AND DATED AT HOMABAY THIS 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2023. G.M.A ONG’ONDOJUDGEPRESENT1. Mr. L.K Obwanda learned counsel for the respondent alongside Mr. Willis Otieno learned counsel for Respondent.2. Ms. B. Ochieng holding brief for Obach learned counsel for appellants.