[2022] KENET 724 (KLR)

[2022] KENET 724 (KLR)

The tribunal determined that the appeal was filed 92 days after the issuance of the EIA Licence, exceeding the statutory 60-day period prescribed by section 129(1) of EMCA. The tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as it was not properly filed within the required timeframe. Consequently,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KENET 724 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jason Edward Matus; Appellant: Catherine Rosemary Bond; Respondent: National Environment Management Authority; Respondent: Intex Construction
Court
National Environment Tribunal - Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Appeal 1 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection upheld; appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction
Judges
Mohamed S Balala, Christine Mwikali Kipsang, Bahati Mwamuye, Waithaka Ngaruiya, Kariuki Muigua
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Statutory Time Limits, Environmental Impact Assessment, Appeal Striking Out
Source Language
en
Environmental Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Tribunal Statutory Time Limits Environmental Impact Assessment Appeal Striking Out

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

Jason Edward Matus

Appellant

Catherine Rosemary Bond

Appellant

National Environment Management Authority

Respondent

Intex Construction

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal filed outside the statutory 60-day period under section 129(1) of EMCA.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be struck out as time-barred.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal determined that the appeal was filed 92 days after the issuance of the EIA Licence, exceeding the statutory 60-day period prescribed by section 129(1) of EMCA. The tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal as it was not properly filed within the required timeframe. Consequently, the preliminary objection by the 1st respondent was upheld, and the appeal was struck out for want of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection upheld; appeal struck out for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • The notice of preliminary objection by the 1st respondent is allowed, striking out the entire appeal.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.