[2020] KEELC 129 (KLR)
The court determined that since the judge who delivered the original judgment is still in station, it is appropriate for her to hear the application for review. The application is not certified as urgent but will be given priority. Proper service upon the respondents is required before the hearing can proceed. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELC 129 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Phyllis Kaminicia; Plaintiff: Rebecca Mwiti Mongorwe; Plaintiff: Julia Nchenge; Defendant: M’Rungwento Mbogori; Defendant: David Silas Safari; Defendant: Joseph Kithinji Kangi
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 59 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for review to be heard by the original judge; not certified urgent but given priority; service to be effected within 14 days.
- Legal Topics
- Review of Judgment, Service of Process, Urgency of Application
- 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
Phyllis Kaminicia
Plaintiff
Rebecca Mwiti Mongorwe
Plaintiff
Julia Nchenge
Plaintiff
M’Rungwento Mbogori
Defendant
David Silas Safari
Defendant
Joseph Kithinji Kangi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for review of judgment should be heard by the judge who delivered the original judgment.
- 2 Whether the application is urgent and should be certified as such.
- 3 Whether proper service of the application upon the respondents has been effected.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that since the judge who delivered the original judgment is still in station, it is appropriate for her to hear the application for review. The application is not certified as urgent but will be given priority. Proper service upon the respondents is required before the hearing can proceed. The matter is scheduled to be heard by the original judge on a specified date, ensuring procedural propriety and fairness to all parties.
Court Disposition
Application for review to be heard by the original judge; not certified urgent but given priority; service to be effected within 14 days.
Orders
- The matter is not certified urgent but will be heard on a priority basis.
- The application is to be properly served upon the respondents within the next 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
MERU ELC CASE NO. 59 OF 2005
PHYLLIS KAMINCIA...............................................................1ST PLAINTIFF
REBECCA MWITI MONGORWE.........................................2ND PLAINTIFF
JULIA NCHENGE....................................................................3RD PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
M’RUNGWENTO MBOGORI ...........................................1ST DEFENDANT
DAVID SILAS SAFARI........................................................2ND DEFENDANT
JOSEPH KITHINJI KANGI................................................3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
1. I note that this court in prayer 2 of the application dated 17th December, 2020 is being asked to review the judgment of the Hon. Lady Justice Lucy Mbugua delivered on 25th April, 2019. In a situation where the Judge who delivered the apposite judgment is still in station, it is desirable that he/she conducts the required review. It is directed as follows:
a) The matter is NOT certified urgent but will be heard on priority basis.
b) This application be properly served upon the respondents within the next 14 days.
c) The application will be heard by the Hon. Lady Justice Lucy Mbugua, at Meru, on 2nd February, 2021.
Delivered in Chambers this 22nd day of December, 2020 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
P. M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE.