[2022] KEELC 3025 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 3025 (KLR)

The court found that the case had not taken off and pre-trial directions had not been fully undertaken. The court considered the draft amended defence and counter-claim and determined that allowing the amendment at this stage would not cause injustice or prejudice to the Plaintiffs. The court relied on Order 8 rule...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 3025 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Church of Christ (Suing through Bishop Peter Macharia Wachira); Respondent: Peter Karumbi Keingati alias Joseph Karumbi Keingati; Respondent: Andrew Watiki Gikore; Respondent: Joseph Nduati Ngendo; Respondent: Samwel Karanja Kamau; Respondent: Kiambu Dandora Company Limited; Respondent: Chief Lands Registrar, Ministry of Lands; Respondent: Karira Kinayanjui Thuo
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 266 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Defence and File Counter Claim
Outcome
Application allowed; leave granted to amend defence and file counter-claim.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Leave to Amend, Counter Claims, Ownership of Land, Pre Trial Directions
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Amendment of Pleadings Leave to Amend Counter Claims Ownership of Land Pre Trial Directions

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Church of Christ (Suing through Bishop Peter Macharia Wachira)

Applicant

Peter Karumbi Keingati alias Joseph Karumbi Keingati

Respondent

Andrew Watiki Gikore

Respondent

Joseph Nduati Ngendo

Respondent

Samwel Karanja Kamau

Respondent

Kiambu Dandora Company Limited

Respondent

Chief Lands Registrar, Ministry of Lands

Respondent

Karira Kinayanjui Thuo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Amend Defence and File Counter Claim

  1. 1 Whether the 3rd and 7th Defendants should be granted leave to file and serve an amended defence with a counter-claim.
  2. 2 Whether allowing the amendment would prejudice the Plaintiffs given the stage of proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the application to amend is an abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the case had not taken off and pre-trial directions had not been fully undertaken. The court considered the draft amended defence and counter-claim and determined that allowing the amendment at this stage would not cause injustice or prejudice to the Plaintiffs. The court relied on Order 8 rule 3(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and the principle from Eastern Bakery v Castelino [1956] EA 461, which encourages amendments before hearing unless injustice would result. The application was therefore allowed, granting the 3rd and 7th Defendants leave to file and serve their amended defence and counter-claim within 14 days, with the Plaintiffs and any other party at liberty...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; leave granted to amend defence and file counter-claim.

Orders

  • The 3rd and 7th Defendants are granted leave to file and serve their draft amended defence and counter-claim within 14 days, failure to which such leave shall lapse.
  • The Plaintiff (and any other party) is at liberty to file their defence thereof within 14 days from date of service.