[2018] KEELC 2041 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had not provided any basis for introducing an additional witness after pre-trial directions had expressly limited the evidence to witness statements and documents already exchanged. The court emphasized that parties are bound by such directions to ensure fairness and orderly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 2041 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Paul Mworia Bagine; Plaintiff: Simon James Kiogora Zakayo; Plaintiff: M’Kiambati M’Ngaruthi; Defendant: Pauline Kagendo Mwari
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 96 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property / Interlocutory Application Ruling
- Outcome
- application disallowed
- Legal Topics
- Pre Trial Directions, Admissibility of Evidence, Calling Additional Witnesses
- 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
Paul Mworia Bagine
Plaintiff
Simon James Kiogora Zakayo
Plaintiff
M’Kiambati M’Ngaruthi
Plaintiff
Pauline Kagendo Mwari
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff can call an additional witness not previously disclosed after pre-trial directions limiting evidence to exchanged witness statements and documents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had not provided any basis for introducing an additional witness after pre-trial directions had expressly limited the evidence to witness statements and documents already exchanged. The court emphasized that parties are bound by such directions to ensure fairness and orderly conduct of proceedings. As no justification was offered for the departure from these directions, the application to call an additional witness was disallowed.
Court Disposition
application disallowed
Orders
- The plaintiff's application to call an additional witness is disallowed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC NO. 96 OF 2017
PAUL MWORIA BAGINE.................................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
SIMON JAMES KIOGORA ZAKAYO............................................2ND PLAINTIFF
M’KIAMBATI M’NGARUTHI.........................................................3RD PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
PAULINE KAGENDO MWARI............................................................DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This trial started on 19. 2.2018. On 17. 5.2018 plaintiff’s counsel made an oral application to call another witness, a physical planning officer. The application was objected to on the basis that no indication was ever made that such a witness would be called.
2. I find that during pre-trial conducted on 5. 2.2018, the court gave directions inter alia that “Only the statements of the witnesses and documents already availed and exchanged will be relied upon”. Plaintiff has not laid a basis as to why he was to introduce another witness mid-stream of the trial.
3. In the circumstances the application by plaintiff is disallowed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2018
IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
Court Assistant:Janet/Galgalo
B.G Kariuki for plaintiff
Miss Nyaga holding brief for Mwanzia
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE