Outer Space Hotels Limited v Kariuki & 3 others (Land Case Appeal E004 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 18374 (KLR) (17 December 2025) (Ruling)

Outer Space Hotels Limited v Kariuki & 3 others (Land Case Appeal E004 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 18374 (KLR) (17 December 2025) (Ruling)

The court was not satisfied that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents' counsel was properly served with the necessary notices and submissions, and given the denial of service and uncertainty of email service without acknowledgment, it was fair and just to set aside the judgment.

Citation
[2025] KEELC 18374 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Outer Space Hotels Limited; 1st Respondent: Dickson Karume Kariuki; 2nd Respondent: Ngata Munyinyi; 3rd Respondent: Gaston Maina Ngondi; 4th Respondent: Land Registrar Kirinyaga; Respondent: Denis
Court
Environment and Land Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
17 December 2025
Case Number
Land Case Appeal E004 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Judgment
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Setting Aside Judgment, Right to Fair Hearing
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Service of Process Setting Aside Judgment Right to Fair Hearing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Outer Space Hotels Limited

Appellant

Dickson Karume Kariuki

1st Respondent

Ngata Munyinyi

2nd Respondent

Gaston Maina Ngondi

3rd Respondent

Land Registrar Kirinyaga

4th Respondent

Denis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment dated 29-4-2025 should be set aside for lack of service of hearing notice, mention notice, and submissions on the 2nd and 3rd Respondents' counsel
  2. 2 Whether failure to serve judgment notice violated the right to a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

The court was not satisfied that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents' counsel was properly served with the necessary notices and submissions, and given the denial of service and uncertainty of email service without acknowledgment, it was fair and just to set aside the judgment.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Judgment dated 29-4-2025 set aside
  • Appeal to be re-heard