[2017] KEELC 229 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 229 (KLR)

The court found that the delay in prosecuting the suit was not inordinate or inexcusable, particularly given the absence of a full-time Environment and Land Court judge during the relevant period. The court emphasized the sensitivity of land matters and the importance of hearing cases on their merits. Applying the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 229 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Samuel Kinpngetich Koskei; Plaintiff: Nancy Chepkurui; Defendant: Wilson Kipkorir Kipkato
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 66 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Inordinate Delay, Judicial Discretion, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Inordinate Delay Judicial Discretion Land Disputes

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Kinpngetich Koskei

Plaintiff

Nancy Chepkurui

Plaintiff

Wilson Kipkorir Kipkato

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to alleged inordinate delay by the plaintiffs.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in prosecuting the suit is excusable under the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether justice can still be served despite the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in prosecuting the suit was not inordinate or inexcusable, particularly given the absence of a full-time Environment and Land Court judge during the relevant period. The court emphasized the sensitivity of land matters and the importance of hearing cases on their merits. Applying the principles from Ivita v Kyumbu and Utalii Transport, the court exercised its discretion to refuse dismissal, finding that justice could still be served and that the plaintiffs should be given an opportunity to prosecute their case. The application for dismissal was therefore disallowed, and directions were given for pre-trial compliance to facilitate expeditious disposal of the...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for dismissal for want of prosecution is disallowed.
  • Parties to comply with pre-trials within 30 days from the date hereof to pave way for expeditious disposal of the case.