[2017] KEELC 1148 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit after it was last fixed for hearing on 21st December 2015 and did not provide any explanation for the delay. The application for dismissal was served on the plaintiff's advocate, who did not respond or offer any justification for the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEELC 1148 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sammy Waithaka Wanjau; Defendant: Kenya Power & Lighting Limited
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 407 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Prosecution, Case Management, Land Disputes
- 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
Sammy Waithaka Wanjau
Plaintiff
Kenya Power & Lighting Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to inaction by the plaintiff.
- 2 Whether the plaintiff provided any explanation for the delay in prosecuting the suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff failed to take any steps to prosecute the suit after it was last fixed for hearing on 21st December 2015 and did not provide any explanation for the delay. The application for dismissal was served on the plaintiff's advocate, who did not respond or offer any justification for the inaction. The court held that, in the absence of any explanation or action by the plaintiff, the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution in accordance with Order 17 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court allowed the application and dismissed the suit with costs to the defendant.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- The plaintiff's suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT OF KENYA
AT MILIMANI
ELC CASE NO. 407 OF 2013
SAMMY WAITHAKA WANJAU............................PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT
= VERSUS =
KENYA POWER & LIGHTING LIMITED...............DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
RULING
1. An application was made by the Defendant/Applicant under order 17 Rule 2(1), (2) and (3) for dismissal of this suit for want of prosecution. The applicant contends that the plaintiff filed this suit on 26th March 2013. A defence was filed on 29th May 2013. The case underwent through pre-trial and was certified ready for hearing.
2. The case was fixed for hearing on 21st of December 2015 but it was not listed. Since then, the Plaintiff/Respondent did not take any steps to have the matter fixed for hearing. The applicant therefore prays for dismissal of this case as the plaintiff has lost interest in the same.
3. The application for dismissal of this case was served upon the plaintiff’s Advocate who did not file any response to the application. There is no doubt that the last activity in this file took place on 20. 2.2015 when this suit was fixed for hearing on 21st December 2015. The case was not listed for hearing. The Plaintiff did not take any step to have the case listed down for hearing until 8th March 2017, when the present application was filed.
4. The plaintiff was obliged to give an explanation why the suit could not be fixed down for hearing. This was not done. When the application came up for hearing on 17th May 2017, the Court directed the applicant to file written submissions. The Plaintiff’s advocate was present. As no explanation has been given why the suit has not been fixed for hearing, I find that this application should be allowed with the result that the plaintiff’s suit is hereby dismissed with costs to the defendant.
It is so ordered.
Dated, Signed and delivered at Nairobion this 10thday of October, 2017.
E.O.OBAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of :
Mr Maina for defendant
Court Assistant: Hilda
E.O.OBAGA
JUDGE