[2020] KEELC 217 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 217 (KLR)

The court found that the appellant had indeed filed her submissions as required, and this was evidenced by the email correspondence acknowledging receipt by the court. The absence of the submissions in the physical court file was not attributable to the appellant. Since the appeal was dismissed for want of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 217 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Lydia Njeri Kiprop; Respondent: Geoffrey Pkite Mosol
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal 6 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Outcome
Application for review allowed; judgment set aside; appeal to be determined on merits.
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Filing of Submissions
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Review of Judgment Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Filing of Submissions

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lydia Njeri Kiprop

Appellant

Geoffrey Pkite Mosol

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant review of the judgment entered on 4th September, 2020.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's submissions were properly filed and considered by the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant had indeed filed her submissions as required, and this was evidenced by the email correspondence acknowledging receipt by the court. The absence of the submissions in the physical court file was not attributable to the appellant. Since the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution despite the appellant's compliance with the court's directions, there was sufficient ground to review and set aside the judgment. The court exercised its discretion to allow the application for review, set aside the judgment of 4th September, 2020, and directed that the appeal be determined on its merits based on the submissions on record.

Court Disposition

Application for review allowed; judgment set aside; appeal to be determined on merits.

Orders

  • The judgment entered on 4th September, 2020 is set aside.
  • The appeal shall be determined on its merits based on the submissions on record.