[2020] KEELC 3927 (KLR)
The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to the 2nd defendant to appeal against the ruling on the admissibility of its replying affidavit, finding that the issue raised was sufficiently arguable to warrant appellate consideration. However, the court determined that the grant of leave would not operate as a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 3927 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mohamud Iltarakwa Kochale; Plaintiff: Kochale Somo Chale; Plaintiff: Issa Jitewe Gambare; Plaintiff: David Tomasot Arakhole; Plaintiff: William Lengoyiap; Plaintiff: Sekotey Seye; Defendant: Lake Turkana Wind Power Ltd; Defendant: Marsabit County Government; Defendant: The Attorney General; Defendant: Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: The National Land Commission; Interested Party: Aaron Iltele Lesianntam; Interested Party: Henry Parasian Sakalpo; Interested Party: Stephen Nakeno; Interested Party: Job Lmalsian Lengoya; Interested Party: Dair Lentipan
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 163 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted to the 2nd defendant; hearing of the main matter to proceed.
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Admissibility of Affidavit, Contempt of Court Proceedings
- 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
Mohamud Iltarakwa Kochale
Plaintiff
Kochale Somo Chale
Plaintiff
Issa Jitewe Gambare
Plaintiff
David Tomasot Arakhole
Plaintiff
William Lengoyiap
Plaintiff
Sekotey Seye
Plaintiff
Lake Turkana Wind Power Ltd
Defendant
Marsabit County Government
Defendant
The Attorney General
Defendant
Chief Land Registrar
Defendant
The National Land Commission
Defendant
Aaron Iltele Lesianntam
Interested Party
Henry Parasian Sakalpo
Interested Party
Stephen Nakeno
Interested Party
Job Lmalsian Lengoya
Interested Party
Dair Lentipan
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 2nd defendant should be granted leave to appeal against the court's ruling on the admissibility of its replying affidavit.
- 2 Whether the hearing of the main matter should proceed despite the grant of leave to appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court exercised its discretion to grant leave to the 2nd defendant to appeal against the ruling on the admissibility of its replying affidavit, finding that the issue raised was sufficiently arguable to warrant appellate consideration. However, the court determined that the grant of leave would not operate as a stay of proceedings, and therefore, the hearing of the main matter would continue. This approach balances the right of the party to seek appellate review with the need to avoid unnecessary delay in the resolution of the substantive dispute.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted to the 2nd defendant; hearing of the main matter to proceed.
Orders
- Leave is granted to the 2nd defendant to file its intended appeal.
- The hearing of this matter will continue.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT MERU
MERU ELC CASE NO. 163 OF 2014
FORMERLY NAIROBI ELC NO. 1330 OF 20114
MOHAMUD ILTARAKWA KOCHALE..........................................1ST PLAINTIFF
KOCHALE SOMO CHALE.............................................................2ND PLAINTIFF
ISSA JITEWE GAMBARE...............................................................3RD PLAINTIFF
DAVID TOMASOT ARAKHOLE...................................................4TH PLAINTIFF
WILLIAM LENGOYIAP.................................................................5TH PLAINTIFF
SEKOTEY SEYE..............................................................................6TH PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
LAKE TURKANA WIND POWER LTD....................................1ST DEFENDANT
MARSABIT COUNTY GOVERNMENT...................................2ND DEFENDANT
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL......................................................3RD DEFENDANT
CHIEF LAND REGISTRAR.........................................................4TH DEFENDANT
THE NATIONAL LAND COMMISSION...................................5TH DEFENDANT
AARON ILTELE LESIANNTAM................................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
HENRY PARASIAN SAKALPO..................................2ND INTERESTED PARTY
STEPHEN NAKENO....................................................3RD INTERESTED PARTY
JOB LMALSIAN LENGOYA.......................................4TH INTERESTED PARTY
DAIR LENTIPAN...........................................................5TH INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. This court on 21st January, 2019 delivered a Ruling concerning the admissibility or inadmissibility of a replying affidavit filed by the 2nd defendant in an application for contempt of court filed by the plaintiffs. The court found that the said replying affidavit was inadmissible.
2. Mr. Minishi, the 2nd defendant’s advocate sought leave to appeal against the court’s Ruling.
3. The court has decided as follows:
a) Leave is granted to the 2nd defendant to file its intended appeal.
b) That notwithstanding, the hearing of this matter will continue.
c) It is so ordered.
Delivered at Meru this 21st day of January, 2020 in the presence of:
CC Susan Lomwa
CC James Lomurut
Mario Loigwera
Kiprop for the Interested Party
A.Hashi for the Plaintiffs
J. M. Wairoto for the 1st defendant
J.W. Kungu for the 3rd and 4th defendants
J. N. Njuguna for the 5th defendants
.................................... .................................. .......................
P.M. NJOROGE [PJ] J.G. KEMEI, J, Y.M. ANGIMA, J,