[2023] KEELC 17036 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 17036 (KLR)

The court found that the 3rd interested party had adduced uncontroverted evidence showing that all relevant parties had been served with his pleadings prior to the adjournment. Since no party contested this evidence or opposed the application, the basis for the previous order requiring the 3rd interested party to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 17036 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Eunice Njeri Kinyanjui; Defendant: Peterson Maina Karumi; Interested Party: Felista Muthoni Mbuthia; Interested Party: Thomas Acahchi Osoro; Interested Party: Sunctus Gitonga Ndegwa
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 126 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Costs Order
Outcome
Application allowed; previous order for payment of adjournment costs set aside; no order as to costs.
Judges
EK Wabwoto
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Adjournment Costs, Service of Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Review of Court Orders Adjournment Costs Service of Pleadings

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eunice Njeri Kinyanjui

Plaintiff

Peterson Maina Karumi

Defendant

Felista Muthoni Mbuthia

Interested Party

Thomas Acahchi Osoro

Interested Party

Sunctus Gitonga Ndegwa

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application to Set Aside/vary Costs Order

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside or vary its previous order requiring the 3rd interested party to pay adjournment costs of Ksh 10,000/-.
  2. 2 Whether the 3rd interested party had properly served pleadings on all relevant parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 3rd interested party had adduced uncontroverted evidence showing that all relevant parties had been served with his pleadings prior to the adjournment. Since no party contested this evidence or opposed the application, the basis for the previous order requiring the 3rd interested party to pay adjournment costs no longer existed. Exercising its discretion judiciously and in the interest of substantive justice, the court set aside the order for payment of adjournment costs, finding that the order was made under a mistaken presumption of non-service.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; previous order for payment of adjournment costs set aside; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The order directing the 3rd interested party to pay adjournment costs of Ksh 10,000/- is set aside.
  • There will be no orders as to costs.