[2023] KEELC 21526 (KLR)
The court found that staying the suit pending the outcome of the succession causes would contravene the constitutional and statutory imperatives for expeditious disposal of cases. The suit had already been pending for over two years, and further delay would defeat the objectives of Article 159 of the Constitution,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 21526 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Joseph Nalutori Lepish; Plaintiff: Christopher Topoika Lepish; Defendant: Kevin Koitalel Lepish
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case E055 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Post Interlocutory Application; Directions for Trial
- Outcome
- Application for stay of proceedings dismissed; directions issued for expeditious prosecution of the suit.
- Judges
- MN Gicheru
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Succession Disputes, Injunctive Relief, Expeditious Trial
- 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
Joseph Nalutori Lepish
Plaintiff
Christopher Topoika Lepish
Plaintiff
Kevin Koitalel Lepish
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Post Interlocutory Application; Directions for Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proceedings in this suit should be stayed pending the determination of related succession causes in the High Court.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to restrain the Defendant from entering the suit land despite his current occupation.
- 3 Whether expeditious disposal of the suit outweighs the reasons for stay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that staying the suit pending the outcome of the succession causes would contravene the constitutional and statutory imperatives for expeditious disposal of cases. The suit had already been pending for over two years, and further delay would defeat the objectives of Article 159 of the Constitution, Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act, and Section 3(1) of the Environment and Land Court Act. The Plaintiffs were directed to prosecute their case promptly or withdraw it, with clear timelines set for compliance and pre-trial conference. The Defendant's application for stay was therefore declined in favor of progressing the matter to trial.
Court Disposition
Application for stay of proceedings dismissed; directions issued for expeditious prosecution of the suit.
Orders
- Plaintiffs to prosecute their case with speed or withdraw it.
- Pre-trial conference set for 20/3/2024.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Lepish & another v Lepish (Environment & Land Case E055 of 2021) [2023] KEELC 21526 (KLR) (15 November 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 21526 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kajiado
Environment & Land Case E055 of 2021
MN Gicheru, J
November 15, 2023
Between
Joseph Nalutori Lepish
1st Plaintiff
Christopher Topoika Lepish
2nd Plaintiff
and
Kevin Koitalel Lepish
Defendant
Ruling
1. This ruling is on the way forward in this matter following the dismissal of the Plaintiffs application for injunction on 17/3/2022. The dismissal followed the revelation by the Defendant that there is succession cause no 95 of 2015 and also no 68 of 2018 pending at the High Court both of which relate to the subject matter herein, that is to say, L.R. Kajiado/Kitengela/27282.
2. The second revelation is that the Defendant is already in occupation of the suit land yet the main prayer vide paragraph 13(a) of the plaint is to restrain him from entering the suit land among other prayers.
3. Even though the Plaintiff was to file written submissions by 30/9/2023, as I write this ruling in late October, I have not received any such submissions. Counsel for the Defendant in his submissions dated 6/4/2023 urges that the suit be stayed pending the outcome of the two pending succession causes. He has cited the authorities of Vijay Kumar Mandal v Rajinder Kumar Mandal (2022) eKLR and Christopher Ndolo Mutuku v CFC Stabic Bank Limited (2015) eKLR both of which dealt with the question of stay of proceedings.
4. I have carefully considered the entire record and the submissions by learned counsel for the Defendant. I am guided by the Constitution which provides that justice shall not be delayed at Article 159. We also have Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act which provides for expeditious resolution of Civil Disputes.Finally, we have Section 3(1) of the Environment and Land Court Act which specifically provides that land cases be heard expeditiously. This suit was filed on 8/9/2021. It has started its third year in court. If it were stayed, we do not know for how much longer it would keep pending. Staying the suit would therefore defeat the three provisions of the Constitution and statute outlined above.
5. For the above stated reasons, I direct that the Plaintiffs prosecute their case with speed or withdraw it. Pre trial conference on 20/3/2024, Plaintiffs to fully comply by filing all their evidence by 20/12/2023. Defendant to close pleadings by 29/2/2024.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KAJIADO VIRTUALLY THIS 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023. M.N. GICHERUJUDGE