[2017] KEHC 1327 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 1327 (KLR)

The court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application for removal of the caution because the judicial review proceedings had concluded, rendering the court functus officio. The application for removal of the caution was therefore not properly before the court. Furthermore, the respondent's interest...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 1327 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Chairman Mbeere Land Dispute Tribunal; Interested Party: Paul Ireri Kanyoti; Applicant: Nyonga Mugo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review 20 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Removal of Caution
Outcome
application struck out with costs to the respondent
Judges
FN Muchemi
Legal Topics
Removal of Caution, Judicial Review Procedure, Land Disputes Tribunal Awards, Succession Proceedings
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Removal of Caution Judicial Review Procedure Land Disputes Tribunal Awards Succession Proceedings

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

Republic

Applicant

Chairman Mbeere Land Dispute Tribunal

Respondent

Paul Ireri Kanyoti

Interested Party

Nyonga Mugo

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Removal of Caution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for removal of a caution after conclusion of judicial review proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the caution lodged on L.R. Evurore/Nthambu/304 should be removed pending determination of a related succession cause.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application for removal of the caution because the judicial review proceedings had concluded, rendering the court functus officio. The application for removal of the caution was therefore not properly before the court. Furthermore, the respondent's interest in the land was still the subject of a pending succession cause, and the caution served to protect that interest until the succession proceedings, including the respondent's protest, were resolved. The court found the application incompetent and struck it out with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application struck out with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application for removal of caution is struck out as incompetent.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.