[2019] KEELC 2828 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 2828 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff had failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit for over five years since 10/4/2013. The Plaintiff did not respond to the application for dismissal, despite being served. The court was satisfied that the delay was inordinate and inexcusable, and that the 1st Defendant was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 2828 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kenya Quarry Self Help Group; Defendant: Gituamba Stones Limited; Defendant: Kenyatta University Co-op. Society
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 904 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit dismissed for want of prosecution. Costs awarded to the 1st Defendant.
Legal Topics
Want of Prosecution, Injunctive Relief, Ownership Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Want of Prosecution Injunctive Relief Ownership Disputes

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

Kenya Quarry Self Help Group

Plaintiff

Gituamba Stones Limited

Defendant

Kenyatta University Co-op. Society

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff's suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff took any steps to prosecute the suit since 10/4/2013.
  3. 3 Whether the 1st Defendant is prejudiced by the continued pendency of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff had failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit for over five years since 10/4/2013. The Plaintiff did not respond to the application for dismissal, despite being served. The court was satisfied that the delay was inordinate and inexcusable, and that the 1st Defendant was prejudiced by the continued pendency of the suit. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the Plaintiff's suit for want of prosecution and awarded costs to the 1st Defendant.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's suit dismissed for want of prosecution. Costs awarded to the 1st Defendant.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
  • The 1st Defendant is awarded the costs of the application and the suit.