[2021] KEELC 221 (KLR)

[2021] KEELC 221 (KLR)

The court found that the absence of the 1st defendant, who was out of the country on a personal work assignment, did not constitute sufficient cause for adjournment. However, the existence of a part-heard murder case involving the 3rd defendant's advocate and a pending related matter in the Court of Appeal were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELC 221 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Maryan Mohamed Cheabril (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Asha Jabril Mohamed (deceased)); Defendant: Michael Koome Mburugu; Defendant: Isiolo County Government; Defendant: Jediel Kirimi Rutere; Defendant: The Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: The National Land Commission; Defendant: The Director of Survey; Defendant: The Attorney General
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Isiolo
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 001 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Land and Environment Case / Ruling on Adjournment Application
Outcome
adjourned
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Hearing, Pending Appeal, Service of Orders
Source Language
en
Land and Property Adjournment of Hearing Pending Appeal Service of Orders

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maryan Mohamed Cheabril (Suing as the administrator of the Estate of Asha Jabril Mohamed (deceased))

Plaintiff

Michael Koome Mburugu

Defendant

Isiolo County Government

Defendant

Jediel Kirimi Rutere

Defendant

The Chief Land Registrar

Defendant

The National Land Commission

Defendant

The Director of Survey

Defendant

The Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Environment Case / Ruling on Adjournment Application

  1. 1 Whether the hearing should be adjourned due to the absence of the 1st defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the existence of a pending Court of Appeal matter justifies adjournment.
  3. 3 Whether proper service of court orders on absent parties is required.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the absence of the 1st defendant, who was out of the country on a personal work assignment, did not constitute sufficient cause for adjournment. However, the existence of a part-heard murder case involving the 3rd defendant's advocate and a pending related matter in the Court of Appeal were considered valid grounds. The court exercised its discretion to adjourn the hearing, emphasizing the need for proper service of orders to absent parties and for updates on the status of the appellate matter at the next mention date.

Court Disposition

adjourned

Orders

  • The hearing of this matter is adjourned.
  • On the next mention date, Mr. Lakicha will apprise the court regarding developments in Court of Appeal No. 205 of 2019 at Nyeri.