[2019] KEELC 4174 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff was the successful party as the defendant did not file a defence and ultimately agreed to compensate the plaintiff through a consent order. However, considering the defendant's demonstrated goodwill in negotiating and settling the matter out of court, and the absence of evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 4174 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Plister Obara Okumu; Defendant: Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 584 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Costs After Settlement of Main Claim
- Outcome
- Plaintiff awarded half the costs of the suit and interest, to be paid by the defendant.
- Judges
- TM Olando
- Legal Topics
- Compensation for Land, Costs Award, Consent Judgment
- 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
Plister Obara Okumu
Plaintiff
Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Costs After Settlement of Main Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs after settlement of the main claim through consent.
- 2 To what extent should the defendant bear the costs of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff was the successful party as the defendant did not file a defence and ultimately agreed to compensate the plaintiff through a consent order. However, considering the defendant's demonstrated goodwill in negotiating and settling the matter out of court, and the absence of evidence that a reasonable offer was made before the suit, the court exercised its discretion under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act to order that the plaintiff is entitled to only half the costs of the suit, to be agreed or taxed, together with interest. This balanced approach recognizes both the plaintiff's success and the defendant's cooperation in resolving the dispute without a...
Court Disposition
Plaintiff awarded half the costs of the suit and interest, to be paid by the defendant.
Orders
- The plaintiff is granted half the costs of the suit and interests to be paid by the defendant.
- Costs to be agreed or taxed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT KISUMU
ELC CASE NO. 584 OF 2015
PLISTER OBARA OKUMU..................................................................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
KENYA ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED...........DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This suit was commenced by Plister Obara Okumu, the Plaintiff, against Kenya Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd, the Defendant, through the plaint dated the 11th May 2012, seeking for permanent injunction in respect of Uholo/Madungu/1109, or in the alternative compensation for the house erected on the said land, plus costs and interest.
2. That the parties appear to have settled the main prayer through a consent on the payment of compensation. That what remains outstanding is the issue of costs. The Learned Counsel for the Defendant and Plaintiff filed their written submissions dated the 30th December 2018 on the issue of costs, and hence this ruling.
3. The Court has carefully considered the pleadings filed, record, written submissions, the decided cases cited therein and come to the following determinations;
a) That Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act Chapter 21 of Laws of Kenya inter alia provides that “the costs of and incidental to all suits shall be in the discretion of the court or Judge , and the Court or Judge shall have full power to determine by whom and out of what property and to what extent such costs are to be paid…………provided that the costs of any action, cause or other matter or issue shall follow the event unless the court or Judge shall for good reason otherwise order.”
b) That though the Defendant did not file any defence to the Plaintiff’s claim, they have participated through Counsel in the various processes, including, hearing of the applications, and entering into consent orders for valuations. That the court through order (a) of the ruling of 31st October 2012, ordered the payment by the Defendant to the Plaintiff of Kshs. 1,800,000/=.
c) That the finding in (b) above shows the court that the Plaintiff is to an extent the successful party in these proceedings and in accordance with the proviso to Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, she is entitled to costs which follow the event.
d) That though the Defendant has opposed costs being awarded to the Plaintiff, there is no evidence that a reasonable offer had been made to the plaintiff before the filing of the suit, and that she declined. The Plaintiff is therefore entitled to some costs, though not all costs as the Defendant has settled out of Court.
e) That as the Defendant has shown good will through the negotiations that led to the valuation and settlement, the court is of the considered view that parties should share the costs. The defendant will therefore pay the Plaintiff half the costs to be agreed or taxed.
4. That flowing from the above findings, the court grants the Plaintiff half the costs of the suit and interests to be paid by the Defendant.
Orders accordingly.
S.M. KIBUNJA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND
JUDGE
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2019
In the presence of:
Plaintiff Absent
Defendant Absent
Counsel M/s Ayieta for Yogo for Plaintiff
S.M. KIBUNJA
ENVIRONMENT & LAND
JUDGE