[2022] KEELC 15228 (KLR)
The court determined that, in the absence of evidence of compliance by the plaintiff with the conditional order for reinstatement (payment of throw away costs within 30 days as ordered on July 31, 2019), the suit may have been automatically dismissed. As a result, the court could not proceed to judgment on the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 15228 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: John Okumu Odula; Defendant: John Owuor Osore
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 30 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Compliance With Conditional Reinstatement Order
- Outcome
- Judgment arrested pending clarification on compliance with conditional reinstatement order.
- Judges
- AY Koross
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Reinstatement of Suit, Compliance With Court Orders
- 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
John Okumu Odula
Plaintiff
John Owuor Osore
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Compliance With Conditional Reinstatement Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff complied with the conditional order for reinstatement of the suit issued on July 31, 2019.
- 2 Whether the suit stands dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-compliance with the court's conditional order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that, in the absence of evidence of compliance by the plaintiff with the conditional order for reinstatement (payment of throw away costs within 30 days as ordered on July 31, 2019), the suit may have been automatically dismissed. As a result, the court could not proceed to judgment on the merits. The court exercised its inherent powers to arrest judgment and directed the parties to address the issue of compliance before any further steps could be taken. The court emphasized that orders are not issued in vain and compliance is mandatory for the suit to subsist.
Court Disposition
Judgment arrested pending clarification on compliance with conditional reinstatement order.
Orders
- Judgment in this matter is hereby arrested pending further directions of the court.
- Parties to address the court on whether there was compliance with the court orders issued on July 31, 2019.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Odula v Osore (Environment & Land Case 30 of 2015) [2022] KEELC 15228 (KLR) (8 December 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 15228 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Siaya
Environment & Land Case 30 of 2015
AY Koross, J
December 8, 2022
Originally Kisumu ELC No 632 of 2015
Between
John Okumu Odula
Plaintiff
and
John Owuor Osore
Defendant
Ruling
1. This court concluded with the hearing of this suit on October 3, 2022. The defendant who had complied with order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules did not attend court and his case was closed. As directed by the court, the plaintiff’s counsel M/s Nabifo filed her written submissions and judgment was reserved for December 8, 2022.
2. As the court was penning down its judgment, and it came across a ruling that was rendered by S.M Kibunja J on July 31, 2019. This ruling has led to the unfortunate turn of events where this court has to render a ruling instead of a judgment.
3. In this ruling, the learned judge issued a conditional reinstatement of the plaintiff’s suit and issued the following orders;a.That the order dismissing the suit for want of prosecution of March 20, 2017 be and is hereby set aside, the suit reinstated, on condition that the plaintiff pays the defendant throw away costs assessed at Kshs 20,000/- only in 30 days.b.That should the plaintiff fail to comply with the condition in (a) above, the setting aside and reinstatement of suit order therein shall lapse automatically.
4. From the court record, there is no evidence that the plaintiff ever complied with these orders and there is a possibility that his suit was long dismissed and there is nothing for this court determine. Court orders are never issued in vain and it is paramount for both parties to address me on this issue.
5. In the circumstances, and, in exercise of its powers under sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, this court issues the following disposal orders–a.That judgment in this matter be and is hereby arrested pending further directions of this court.b.That the parties do address the court on whether there was compliance with the court orders issued on July 31, 2019. c.That the matter be mentioned for directions on January 31, 2023. d.That there shall be no orders as to costs.It is so ordered.
DELIVERED AND DATED AT SIAYA THIS 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022. HON. A. Y. KOROSSJUDGE8/12/2022Ruling delivered virtually through Microsoft Teams Video Conferencing Platform in the Presence of:In the Presence of:N/A for the plaintiffN/A for the defendantCourt assistant: Ishmael Orwa