[2023] KEELC 891 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 891 (KLR)

The court found that the interests of justice required granting the appellants an extension of time to file and serve an application for substitution of the respondent. The court exercised its discretion under section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act and sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, guided by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 891 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jacob Olango Onunda; Appellant: James Oura Ombuto; Respondent: Joseph Odhiambo Rabita; Respondent: Russalia 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 Notice of Motion for Extension of Time and Substitution
Outcome
Application for extension of time allowed; other prayers abandoned.
Judges
GMA Ongondo
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Substitution of Parties, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Extension of Time Substitution of Parties Appeal Procedure

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacob Olango Onunda

Appellant

James Oura Ombuto

Appellant

Joseph Odhiambo Rabita

Respondent

Russalia Rabita

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time and Substitution

  1. 1 Whether the appellants should be granted an extension of time to file an application for substitution of the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the substitution of the respondent is warranted in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the interests of justice required granting the appellants an extension of time to file and serve an application for substitution of the respondent. The court exercised its discretion under section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act and sections 3 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, guided by the principle that procedural technicalities should not override substantive justice. The court noted that prayers for transfer and substitution in the original motion were abandoned, and only the extension of time was considered and allowed. The appellants were given 14 days to file and serve the application for substitution, and the matter was set for mention to monitor...

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time allowed; other prayers abandoned.

Orders

  • Prayers 4 and 5 of the Notice of Motion marked as abandoned.
  • Prayer 2 for extension of time is allowed.