[2021] KEELC 2779 (KLR)
The court found that the hearing date of 12/4/2021 was fixed in the absence of the parties and their counsel, and there was no evidence that the defendant's counsel was served with a hearing notice. As a result, the claim that the defendant's counsel was unaware of the hearing date was accepted as true. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 2779 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Matui Naibei; Defendant: Gladys Masai
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 164 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application for Setting Aside Order Closing Defence Case
- Outcome
- application granted
- Legal Topics
- Setting Aside Orders, Reopening Defence Case, Service of Hearing Notice, Right to Be Heard
- 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
Matui Naibei
Plaintiff
Gladys Masai
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application for Setting Aside Order Closing Defence Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the order made on 12/4/2021 closing the defence case should be set aside.
- 2 Whether the defence case should be re-opened to allow the defendant to testify.
- 3 Whether the defendant's counsel was properly served with a hearing notice for 12/4/2021.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the hearing date of 12/4/2021 was fixed in the absence of the parties and their counsel, and there was no evidence that the defendant's counsel was served with a hearing notice. As a result, the claim that the defendant's counsel was unaware of the hearing date was accepted as true. The court held that it would be just to set aside the order closing the defence case and to re-open the defence case to allow the defendant to testify. The application was therefore granted to uphold the right to be heard and to prevent prejudice to the defendant.
Court Disposition
application granted
Orders
- The order made on 12/4/2021 closing the defence case is set aside.
- The defence case is re-opened and the defendant is allowed to testify.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KITALE
LAND CASE NO. 164 OF 2017
MATUI NAIBEI...................................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
GLADYS MASAI............................................................DEFENDANT
RULING
1. By a Notice of Motion dated 24/5/2021 and filed on 27/5/2021 brought under Sections 1A, 1B, 3and3Aof theCivil Procedure Act, Order 36 Rule 7of theCivil Procedure Rules, the defendant/applicant seeks orders that the order made on 12/4/2021 closing the defence case be set aside and upon setting aside the order made on 12/4/2021, the defence case be re-opened and the defendant be allowed to testify and that the costs this application do abide to the outcome of the main suit.
2. The application is supported by the affidavit of Michael Wafula, the defendant’s counsel, sworn on 24/5/2021. The application is premised on the grounds that this suit was scheduled for hearing on 12/4/2021 and the defence never attended court and the defence was deemed as closed; that the defendant’s advocate never saw the hearing notice for that date and thus could not attend; that it will be fair and just if the defence case is opened and the defendant together with her witnesses are allowed to testify; that no party shall be prejudiced if the orders sought are granted; it is stated that the demands of justice favour the grant of the orders sought.
The Response
3. No response was filed to the application.
Submissions
4. Parties did not file any submissions to the application.
Determination
5. I have considered the application. The applicant’s counsel states in the supporting affidavit that he never saw the hearing notice in respect of the hearing scheduled for 12/4/2021. On that day the matter was called out and neither the defendant nor his counsel were in court. I have considered that the subject hearing date was fixed in the absence of the parties and their counsel when the matter came up for mention on 2/12/2020. I have also perused the court file and found no evidence that the defendant’s counsel was served with a hearing notice for that date. Consequently the claim that he was not aware of the hearing date must be considered to be true and the instant application has merit.
6. I therefore grant the application dated 24/5/2021 and I also order that the matter shall be mentioned by way of teleconference on 1/7/2021 for the fixing of a hearing date. By this ruling the parties are so notified.
It’s so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KITALE VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ON THIS 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021.
MWANGI NJOROGE
JUDGE, ELC, KITALE.