[2023] KEELC 935 (KLR)
The court found the application for substitution of the applicant in place of the deceased respondent to be meritorious, as there was no objection from any party. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Rules to allow the substitution, permit the applicant to act in person, and made no order as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 935 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Opiyo Odhiambo; Respondent: Jacob Olango Onunda; Respondent: James Oura Ombuto; Respondent: Joseph Odhiambo Rabita
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 19 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Substitution Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed.
- Judges
- GMA Ongondo
- Legal Topics
- Party Substitution, Appeal Procedure, Representation of Deceased Estate
- 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
Peter Opiyo Odhiambo
Applicant
Jacob Olango Onunda
Respondent
James Oura Ombuto
Respondent
Joseph Odhiambo Rabita
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Substitution Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be substituted for the deceased respondent for purposes of defending the appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicant should be allowed to act in person in the proceedings.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded in the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found the application for substitution of the applicant in place of the deceased respondent to be meritorious, as there was no objection from any party. The court exercised its discretion under the Civil Procedure Rules to allow the substitution, permit the applicant to act in person, and made no order as to costs. The orders sought were granted in full as prayed in the application.
Court Disposition
Application allowed.
Orders
- The applicant is substituted for the deceased respondent for purposes of defending the appeal to its conclusion.
- The applicant is allowed to act in person.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Odhiambo v Onunda & 2 others (Environment and Land Appeal 19 of 2022) [2023] KEELC 935 (KLR) (21 February 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 935 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Environment and Land Appeal 19 of 2022
GMA Ongondo, J
February 21, 2023
Between
Peter Opiyo Odhiambo
Applicant
and
Jacob Olango Onunda
1st Respondent
James Oura Ombuto
2nd Respondent
Joseph Odhiambo Rabita
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant, Peter Opiyo Odhiambo who appears in person filed an application by way of a Notice of Motion dated February 2, 2023 on February 8, 2023 seeking the orders that:a.The Honourable Court be pleased to substitute the Applicant with the Respondent (Deceased) for purposes of defending the Appeal to its conclusion.b.Upon prayer 1 being granted the Honourable Court be pleased to allow the Applicant to act in person.c.There be no orders as to costs.
2. Mr Robert Ochieng instructed by the firm of G.S Okoth and Company Advocates for the deceased Respondent, Joseph Odhiambo Rabita, has no objection to the application in its entirely.
3. Also, Ms Aluoch Odera for the appellants/respondents have no objection to the orders sought in the application.
4. In the foregone, I find this application meritorious.
5. So, I proceed to allow the application in terms of orders (a), (b) and (c) sought therein and as stated at paragraph 1(a)(b) and (c) hereinabove.
6. It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT HOMABAY THIS 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023. G.M.A ONG’ONDOJUDGEIn the presence of:Applicant in personMs. Aluoch Odera, learned counsel for the Appellants/Respondents.Mr. R. Ochieng, instructed by the firm of G.S Okoth and Company Advocates for the Deceased Respondent.