[2020] KEELC 754 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 754 (KLR)

The court found that since the presiding judge had already rendered a ruling on a similar reference in the same file, it would not be in the best interest of justice for the same judge to determine the subsequent reference. To preserve impartiality and avoid the appearance of bias, the matter should be allocated to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 754 (KLR)
Parties
Respondent: Kimani Richu & Associates Advocates; Applicant: Centurion Holdings Limited
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 225 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Reference on Taxation; Directions for Reallocation
Outcome
Reference not determined; matter to be reallocated to a different judge.
Judges
BM Eboso
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Reference Procedure, Judicial Recusal
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Taxation of Costs Reference Procedure Judicial Recusal

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kimani Richu & Associates Advocates

Respondent

Centurion Holdings Limited

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Reference on Taxation; Directions for Reallocation

  1. 1 Whether the presiding judge should determine a reference challenging the Taxing Officer's award after having previously ruled on a similar reference in the same file.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require recusal and reallocation to a different judge.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that since the presiding judge had already rendered a ruling on a similar reference in the same file, it would not be in the best interest of justice for the same judge to determine the subsequent reference. To preserve impartiality and avoid the appearance of bias, the matter should be allocated to a different judge for determination. The court therefore directed that the file be mentioned before the Presiding Judge for reallocation.

Court Disposition

Reference not determined; matter to be reallocated to a different judge.

Orders

  • The file shall be mentioned before the Presiding Judge of the Environment and Land Court on 12/11/2020 for allocation to a different judge for disposal of the present reference.