[2025] KEELC 4841 (KLR)

[2025] KEELC 4841 (KLR)

The court found that the application for leave to appeal was filed timeously and that there was no sufficient reason to refuse the defendant the opportunity to institute an appeal. The court recognized that the right to appeal is not automatic and must be granted by statute or court order. Considering the arguments and the relevant legal provisions, the court exercised its discretion in favor of the applicant, finding the application meritorious and allowing it in terms of the prayers sought. The court also ordered that the costs of the application be in the cause.

Citation
[2025] KEELC 4841 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Lucia Nyagaki Mburu; Defendant: Teresia Wanjiku Wainaina
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Thika
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
28 April 2025
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 319 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed; leave to appeal granted.
Judges
JM Onyango
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Additional Witnesses, Right to Be Heard, Natural Justice, Timely Administration of Justice
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land and Property Leave to Appeal Additional Witnesses Right to Be Heard Natural Justice Timely Administration of Justice

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lucia Nyagaki Mburu

Plaintiff

Teresia Wanjiku Wainaina

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be granted leave to appeal against the ruling declining her request to call an additional witness.
  2. 2 Whether the notice of appeal filed by the defendant should be deemed properly filed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for leave to appeal was filed timeously and that there was no sufficient reason to refuse the defendant the opportunity to institute an appeal. The court recognized that the right to appeal is not automatic and must be granted by statute or court order. Considering the arguments and the relevant legal provisions, the court exercised its discretion in favor of the applicant, finding the application meritorious and allowing it in terms of the prayers sought. The court also ordered that the costs of the application be in the cause.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; leave to appeal granted.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the defendant to appeal against the ruling rendered on 26/2/2025.
  • The Notice of Appeal dated 11/3/2025 is deemed properly filed.