[2019] KEHC 11151 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 11151 (KLR)

The court found that the supplementary list of documents was filed without leave of the court, but considered the merits regardless of procedural technicalities. The twitter thread sought to be admitted as evidence was authored by Cyprian Nyakundi, who is neither a party to the suit nor shown to be an agent or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 11151 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Patrick Nyoike; Defendant: Linus Gitahi; Defendant: Nation Media Group Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 330 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Supplementary Evidence
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
BT Jaden
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Defamation, Supplementary Documents
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Tort Law Admissibility of Evidence Defamation Supplementary Documents

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Nyoike

Applicant

Linus Gitahi

Defendant

Nation Media Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Supplementary Evidence

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff can rely on a supplementary list of documents as evidence without leave of the court.
  2. 2 Whether a twitter thread authored by a third party can be admitted as evidence against the Defendants.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff has complied with the Evidence Act in seeking to admit the document.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the supplementary list of documents was filed without leave of the court, but considered the merits regardless of procedural technicalities. The twitter thread sought to be admitted as evidence was authored by Cyprian Nyakundi, who is neither a party to the suit nor shown to be an agent or employee of the Defendants. The Plaintiff did not establish a link between the alleged republication and the Defendants. Furthermore, the Plaintiff failed to comply with the requirements of the Evidence Act regarding the production of documents. As a result, the court sustained the objection and dismissed the application to admit the supplementary document.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Plaintiff's application to rely on the supplementary list of documents is dismissed.
  • Objection by the Defendants is sustained.