[2012] KEHC 3081 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff/Respondent had made reasonable efforts to secure a hearing date, as evidenced by invitations to the Defendant's advocate and attempts to fix a date at the registry. The delay was attributed to the unavailability of hearing dates rather than any fault or indolence on the part of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 3081 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission; Defendant: Kapsoen Estates Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 2092 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Fixing Hearing Dates, Corruption Related Land Disputes
- 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
Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission
Plaintiff
Kapsoen Estates Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inactivity since July 2010.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiff/Respondent has provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in prosecuting the suit.
- 3 Whether the Defendant/Applicant has suffered prejudice as a result of the delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff/Respondent had made reasonable efforts to secure a hearing date, as evidenced by invitations to the Defendant's advocate and attempts to fix a date at the registry. The delay was attributed to the unavailability of hearing dates rather than any fault or indolence on the part of the Plaintiff/Respondent. Furthermore, the Defendant/Applicant failed to demonstrate that it had suffered serious prejudice as a result of the delay. Given that the matter involves issues of corruption, which are of national interest, and that the parties had already complied with the discovery process, the interests of justice required that the suit proceed to hearing rather than...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The Defendant/Applicant's application dated 6/3/2012 is dismissed.
- The Plaintiff is to make effort to take a hearing date within the year.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA ATNAIROBI
ENVIRONMENTAL & LAND CASE 2092 OF 2007
KENYA ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION…....……..PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
KAPSOEN ESTATES LIMITED……………………..…..DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
RULING
The Defendant/Applicant in the Notice of Motion application dated 6/3/12 seeks orders that the Plaintiff’s/Respondent’s suit be dismissed for want of prosecution on grounds that no action has taken place since 5/7/2010 when a Notice of Change of Advocates was filed.
In response to the said application the Plaintiff/Respondent in a Replying Affidavit sworn on 30/5/12 depones that the Plaintiff has invited the Defendant’s advocate and/or their representative on two occasions to attend the registry for purposes of fixing a hearing date. However, that on both occasions, the Court Registry indicated either that the Court Diary was closed, or that there were no available dates.
I have read and I am satisfied with the explanation given by the Plaintiff’s/Respondent’s in the Replying Affidavit that it has made effort to secure a hearing date. Further, in view of the parties having complied with the discovery process, and the matter touching on corruption which is a national interest, it would be in the interest of justice that this matter proceeds to hearing. I do agree that the Defendant/Applicant has not suffered serious prejudice.
In the circumstances, I decline to issue the orders sought and dismiss the Defendant/Applicant’s application dated 6/3/2012. Let the Plaintiff make effort to take a hearing date within the year. Costs shall be in the cause.
Orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered this 19thday of July 2012
R. OUGO
JUDGE
In the Presence of:-
……………………………...…………For the Applicants
……………………………………..For the Respondents
Kabiru................................................................Court Clerk