[2018] KEELC 3319 (KLR)
The court found that the ex-parte applicant and the Interested Party failed to attend court and did not show cause as required by the notice issued under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Their absence was interpreted as a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit. Consequently, the court exercised its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3319 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic of Kenya; Respondent: Kirea Gaicu (Chief Kathangachini Location); Interested Party: Stella Mukari Njagi; Applicant: Reuben Kijiru
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review 19 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal Under Order 17 Rule 2(1) Civil Procedure Rules
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution; all previous orders vacated; costs to respondent
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Order 17 Rule 2, Judicial Review Procedure
- 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
Republic of Kenya
Applicant
Kirea Gaicu (Chief Kathangachini Location)
Respondent
Stella Mukari Njagi
Interested Party
Reuben Kijiru
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Notice to Show Cause for Dismissal Under Order 17 Rule 2(1) Civil Procedure Rules
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the ex-parte applicant and the Interested Party failed to attend court and did not show cause as required by the notice issued under Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Their absence was interpreted as a lack of interest in prosecuting the suit. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit for want of prosecution and vacated all previous orders, awarding costs to the Respondent.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution; all previous orders vacated; costs to respondent
Orders
- The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- All orders issued in this suit are hereby vacated.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA JUDICIAL REVIEW CASE NO. 19 OF 2017
REPUBLIC OF KENYA....................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
KIREA GAICU (CHIEF KATHANGACHINI LOCATION)....RESPONDENT
AND
STELLA MUKARI NJAGI..............................................INTERESTED PARTY
REUBEN KIJIRU.........................................................EX-PARTE APPLICANT
RULING
1. Notice was properly issued for parties to come to court to show cause why the suit should not be dismissed in terms of the provision contained in Order 17 Rule 2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
2. The ex-parte applicant and the Interested Party were not in court. Mr. Kiongo told the court that their absence was indicative of the fact that they were no longer interested in the suit. He urged the court to dismiss the suit with costs to the Respondents.
3. I find that no cause has been shown to the satisfaction of the court that the suit should NOT be dismissed.
4. In the circumstances, this suit, is dismissed.
5. All orders issued in this suit are hereby vacated.
6. Costs are awarded to the Respondent.
7. It is so ordered.
Delivered in open Court at Chuka this 17th day of May, 2018 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Kiongo for the Respondent
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE