[2014] KEHC 7303 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated discovery of new matter, specifically that the land could be subdivided into eight plots instead of six as previously believed. The respondent did not oppose the application or provide any reason why the review should not be granted. The court was satisfied that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 7303 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: N W W; Respondent: N W W
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 53 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Consent Orders
- Outcome
- application for review allowed
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Review of Court Orders, Consent Orders, Discovery of New Evidence
- 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
N W W
Applicant
N W W
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Consent Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient grounds for review of the consent orders recorded on 25th March 2009.
- 2 Whether discovery of new evidence justifies the review of the consent orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated discovery of new matter, specifically that the land could be subdivided into eight plots instead of six as previously believed. The respondent did not oppose the application or provide any reason why the review should not be granted. The court was satisfied that the requirements for review under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules had been met, and that the proposed changes would not adversely affect the respondent. Accordingly, the court allowed the application for review and ordered that the consent orders be amended as proposed by the applicant.
Court Disposition
application for review allowed
Orders
- The application dated 19th October 2012 is allowed in the terms proposed therein.
- The consent orders recorded on 25th March 2009 are reviewed as sought by the applicant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
HIGH COURT CIVIL NO. 53 OF 2006
N W W…………….APPLICANT
VERSUS
N W W…..……RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The application dated 19th October, 2014 seeks review of the consent orders recorded on 25th March 2009. LR No. [particulars withheld] was to be subdivided into subplots measuring 50 x 100 feet out of which two (2) plots would be registered in the applicant name and the balance to four named persons. The applicant argues that the survey of the land has revealed that land could be subdivided into eight (8) plots instead of six (6).
2. The respondent, in his reply in the affidavit sworn on 13th November 2012, does not advance any reason why the review sought by the applicant cannot be allowed.
3. I have noted from the court order that the applicant was entitled to portions of [particulars withheld] while the respondent was to exclusively get [particulars withheld]. The proposed changes therefore will not affect him in any way.
4. Review under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules is obtainable on grounds of errors on the face of the record, discovery of new matter and any other sufficient reason. It is pleaded that review in this case is sought on discovery of new matter – that [particulars withheld] could be divided into eight (8) plots instead of six (6).
5. I have been referred to the decision of Nyarangi JA in Wangechi Kimita & another –vs- Mutahi Wakibiru Nyeri CACA No. 80 of 1985, where His Lordship ruled that discovery of new matter or evidence could be basis for review of consent orders.
6. I am convinced that the applicant has made a case for review of the consent orders recorded on 25th May 2009. I will allow the application dated 19th October 2012 in the terms proposed therein. Costs shall be in the cause.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this31st DAY OF January, 2014.
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE