[2018] KEELC 3367 (KLR)
The court found that since the tribunal award had already been quashed by its judgment of 30th June 2017, there was no longer any legal obstacle preventing the applicant from subdividing his land as he wished. The application to change advocates after judgment was properly before the court and merited, as there was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELC 3367 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Meru Central District Dispute Tribunal; Respondent: Chief Magistrate Court (Meru); Respondent: Betty Kagwiria; Respondent: Mary Gacheri Mereria; Respondent: Samson Mugambi Mwereria; Applicant: M'Mwereria M'Rinkanya
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 53 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Application to Change Advocates and for Consequential Orders
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Change of Advocates, Tribunal Award Quashing
- 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
Applicant
Meru Central District Dispute Tribunal
Respondent
Chief Magistrate Court (Meru)
Respondent
Betty Kagwiria
Respondent
Mary Gacheri Mereria
Respondent
Samson Mugambi Mwereria
Respondent
M'Mwereria M'Rinkanya
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Post Judgment Application to Change Advocates and for Consequential Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant should be allowed to change advocates after judgment.
- 2 Whether there is any legal impediment to the applicant subdividing his land following the quashing of the tribunal award.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the tribunal award had already been quashed by its judgment of 30th June 2017, there was no longer any legal obstacle preventing the applicant from subdividing his land as he wished. The application to change advocates after judgment was properly before the court and merited, as there was no opposition or prejudice shown. Accordingly, the court allowed the application and made no order as to costs.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The firm of Okubasu & Munene Advocates is allowed to come on record after judgment in place of AG Riungu & Co. Advocates.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT MERU
ELC MISC JR 53 OF 2011
REPUBLIC ……………………………………...………………. APPLICANT
VERSUS
MERU CENTRAL DISTRICT DISPUTE TRIBUNAL … 1ST RESPONENT
CHIEF MAGISTRATE COURT (MERU) …………..… 2ND RESPONDENT
BETTY KAGWIRIA ……………………………………. 3RD RESPONDENT
MARY GACHERI MERERIA …………………….…… 4TH RESPONDENT
SAMSON MUGAMBI MWERERIA ………………….. 5TH RESPONDENT
M’MWERERIA M’RINKANYA …. EXPARTE APPLICANT/APPLICANT
RULING
1. The application dated 27th April 2018 seeks the following orders
i. Spent.
ii. That the honourable be pleased to allow the firm of Okubasu & Munene advocates to come on record after judgment in place of AG Riungu & Co. Advocates.
iii. That the honourable court be pleased to grant any other order or better relief as shall meet the ends of justice.
iv. That cost of this application be provided for.
2. The application is supported by grounds on the face of the application and on the affidavit of the applicant.
3. I note that the tribunal award was quashed via the judgment of this court given on 30. 6.2017. There is nothing in the way for the applicant to subdivide his land as he wishes. It follows that the prayers sought herein are merited. The application is allowed with no orders as to costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MERU THIS 15th DAY OF MAY, 2018 IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
Court Assistant:Janet/Galgalo
Okubasu for plaintiff absent
Mutunga holding brief for Kiongo for respondent
HON. LUCY. N. MBUGUA
ELC JUDGE