[2020] KEELC 1783 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 1783 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants failed to prosecute their notice of motion dated 07/01/2020 by neglecting to file and serve submissions as directed, despite being accorded the right to be heard under Article 50(1) of the Constitution. The court emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of cases under Article...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 1783 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Lucy Ghati; Defendant: Alex Wambura John; Defendant: Charles Matinde Nyakoba
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Migori
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 346 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to respondent
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Dismissal of Application, Costs Award, Right to Be Heard, Failure to Prosecute
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Dismissal of Application Costs Award Right to Be Heard Failure to Prosecute

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lucy Ghati

Plaintiff

Alex Wambura John

Defendant

Charles Matinde Nyakoba

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' notice of motion dated 07/01/2020 should be allowed or dismissed.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were accorded their right to be heard under Article 50(1) of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to prosecute their notice of motion dated 07/01/2020 by neglecting to file and serve submissions as directed, despite being accorded the right to be heard under Article 50(1) of the Constitution. The court emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of cases under Article 159(2)(b) and held that the application lacked merit. Consequently, the notice of motion was dismissed with costs to the respondent pursuant to Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and relevant case law.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to respondent

Orders

  • The notice of motion dated 07/01/2020 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • Orders accordingly.