[2018] KEELC 3137 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 3137 (KLR)

The court found that the 2nd and 3rd Defendants' application for review was unfounded because the issues raised in their Grounds of Opposition and Preliminary Objection had already been considered and addressed in the ruling delivered on 30/5/2014. No new matter or evidence was presented in the review application to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 3137 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Margaret Wakuru Nyutho; Defendant: Joseph Kiarie Njoroge; Defendant: Dr. Dominic Kibigo Karanja; Defendant: Maurine Kawira Kibigo; Defendant: The Chief Land Registrar
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 98 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Review
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Review of Court Orders, Grounds of Opposition, Preliminary Objection, Land Registration
Source Language
en
Land and Property Review of Court Orders Grounds of Opposition Preliminary Objection Land Registration

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret Wakuru Nyutho

Plaintiff

Joseph Kiarie Njoroge

Defendant

Dr. Dominic Kibigo Karanja

Defendant

Maurine Kawira Kibigo

Defendant

The Chief Land Registrar

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd and 3rd Defendants have established sufficient grounds for review of the court's ruling delivered on 30/5/2014.
  2. 2 Whether any new matters have been raised in the review application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 2nd and 3rd Defendants' application for review was unfounded because the issues raised in their Grounds of Opposition and Preliminary Objection had already been considered and addressed in the ruling delivered on 30/5/2014. No new matter or evidence was presented in the review application to justify revisiting the earlier decision. The application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The 2nd and 3rd Defendants' Notice of Motion dated 11/3/2015 is dismissed with costs.