[2024] KEHC 8392 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 8392 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant's failure to attend the hearing was due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically poor network connectivity, and not due to any deliberate inaction. The court was satisfied that the respondents were duly served with the application and hearing notice. In the interests of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 8392 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Isaac Fula Siaka; Respondent: The County Government Of Kakamega; Respondent: The County Director Of Survey Kakamega; Respondent: The Kenya Rural Roads Authority
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review 4 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
application allowed; suit reinstated
Judges
AC Bett
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Suit, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Judicial Review Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Reinstatement of Suit Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Judicial Review Procedure

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

Isaac Fula Siaka

Applicant

The County Government Of Kakamega

Respondent

The County Director Of Survey Kakamega

Respondent

The Kenya Rural Roads Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

  1. 1 Whether the order dismissing the suit for want of prosecution should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient cause for non-attendance at the hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's failure to attend the hearing was due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically poor network connectivity, and not due to any deliberate inaction. The court was satisfied that the respondents were duly served with the application and hearing notice. In the interests of justice, and considering the age of the matter, the court exercised its discretion to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the suit for hearing. The court also issued directions for the filing and service of written submissions to ensure expeditious disposal of the matter.

Court Disposition

application allowed; suit reinstated

Orders

  • The application dated 19/1/2024 is allowed as prayed.
  • The order issued on 14/12/2023 dismissing the suit for want of prosecution is set aside.