[2023] KEELC 384 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 384 (KLR)

The court declined to render a ruling on the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit because the respondent and his counsel had not been properly notified of the application or the hearing date. The court emphasized that the principles of fair hearing and access to justice require that all...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 384 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Joseph Onyango Ogosi; Defendant: Cornel Akacha Gworo
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 5 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit
Outcome
Ruling on the application deferred; new date fixed for ruling after proper notification to parties.
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Suit, Right to Be Heard, Service of Process, Dismissal Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Reinstatement of Suit Right to Be Heard Service of Process Dismissal Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Onyango Ogosi

Plaintiff

Cornel Akacha Gworo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Suit

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was properly notified of the application and hearing date.
  2. 2 Whether the court can proceed to rule on the application in the absence of notification to the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the principles of fair hearing and access to justice require service and opportunity to be heard before determination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to render a ruling on the application to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the suit because the respondent and his counsel had not been properly notified of the application or the hearing date. The court emphasized that the principles of fair hearing and access to justice require that all parties be served and given an opportunity to be heard before any determination is made. Accordingly, the ruling on the application was deferred and a new date fixed, with directions for the Deputy Registrar to notify counsel for both parties using the fastest and most convenient means, including email.

Court Disposition

Ruling on the application deferred; new date fixed for ruling after proper notification to parties.

Orders

  • Ruling on the application is fixed for February 28, 2023.
  • Deputy Registrar to notify counsel for the respective parties via email or any other fastest and convenient method.