[2018] KEHC 4941 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 4941 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay, namely the alleged loss of the file at the registry, was not credible given the respondent's evidence that the file was available. The court characterized the applicant's conduct as indolent, noting there was no reason for failing to check the registry....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 4941 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jennifer Naliaka Hassan; Respondent: ADC (Olingatogo Farm); Defendant: George Barasa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 13 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Application allowed; dismissal set aside; appeal reinstated with conditions.
Judges
HK Chemitei
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Court Registry Practice
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Reinstatement of Suit Court Registry Practice

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

Jennifer Naliaka Hassan

Appellant

ADC (Olingatogo Farm)

Respondent

George Barasa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution should be set aside and the appeal reinstated.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's explanation for delay due to alleged loss of file at the registry is sufficient.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's explanation for the delay, namely the alleged loss of the file at the registry, was not credible given the respondent's evidence that the file was available. The court characterized the applicant's conduct as indolent, noting there was no reason for failing to check the registry. However, since the dismissal was done suo moto by the court and not on the respondent's application, the court exercised its discretion to avoid driving the applicant from the seat of justice. The application to set aside the dismissal was allowed, but the applicant was directed to process the appeal within 30 days, and costs of the application were awarded to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; dismissal set aside; appeal reinstated with conditions.

Orders

  • The dismissal order made on 20/3/2017 is set aside.
  • The appeal is reinstated and must be processed within 30 days from the date of the ruling.