[2022] KEELC 14445 (KLR)
The court declined to grant leave to appeal the interlocutory ruling because the proceedings were at an advanced stage, with 3DW1 being the last witness. The court found that the document in question originated from the defence, and the applicant's chances of success on appeal were remote since 3DW1 was a competent...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 14445 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Daniel Kimemia Mwangi; Defendant: Peter Kariuki Thiro; Defendant: Kenton Kijabe Co-operative Society; Defendant: Land Registrar Naivasha
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 122 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Decision
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Admissibility of Evidence, Production of Documents
- 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
Daniel Kimemia Mwangi
Plaintiff
Peter Kariuki Thiro
Defendant
Kenton Kijabe Co-operative Society
Defendant
Land Registrar Naivasha
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the interlocutory ruling allowing production of a certified copy of the Land Register by 3DW1.
- 2 Whether the admission of the document can be challenged at the main appeal after conclusion of proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to grant leave to appeal the interlocutory ruling because the proceedings were at an advanced stage, with 3DW1 being the last witness. The court found that the document in question originated from the defence, and the applicant's chances of success on appeal were remote since 3DW1 was a competent witness to produce the document. Furthermore, any objections to the admission of the document could be raised in an appeal after the conclusion of the trial, thus avoiding unnecessary delay in the litigation. The court exercised its discretion to refuse leave, prioritizing the expeditious conclusion of the proceedings.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is declined.
- Hearing to proceed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Mwangi v Thiro & 2 others (Environment & Land Case 122 of 2014) [2022] KEELC 14445 (KLR) (28 October 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 14445 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Environment & Land Case 122 of 2014
FM Njoroge, J
October 28, 2022
Between
Daniel Kimemia Mwangi
Plaintiff
and
Peter Kariuki Thiro
1st Defendant
Kenton Kijabe Co-operative Society
2nd Defendant
Land Registrar Naivasha
3rd Defendant
Ruling
1. This court has been treated to an application by Mr. Gekonga for leave to appeal against the Ruling of this court allowing the witness 3DW1 to produce a copy of the Land Register certified by her office in evidence in this case. The other counsel, for the plaintiff and for the 3rd defendant oppose the grant of that leave. They state that the admissions of that document can be made a ground of appeal at the main appeal if there will be any at the end of these proceedings.
2. I have considered the application and the response and I have found it necessary to decline the application for leave to appeal owing to the reasons stated by counsel for the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant.
3. These proceedings are at their tail end and 3DW1 is the last witness in this matter. Though the rulings in interlocutory matters can be appealed against, I have considered two things: (1) the fact that the document in question emanates from the defence and not the plaintiff and Mr. Gekonga is for some section of that defence, and (2) that the analysis I gave hereinbefore prior to allowing the production of that document by 3DW1 is indicative of remote chances of success on appeal as 3DW1 is a competent witness to produce the document and the original could still have been availed albeit it would have necessitated an adjournment and delay in the conclusion of this litigation.
4. I therefore decline that application for leave. Hearing to proceed.
DATED, SIGNED AND ISSUED AT NAKURU IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022. MWANGI NJOROGEJUDGE, ELC, NAKURU