[2008] KEHC 272 (KLR)
The court found that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents were parties to the application, were compelled to participate, and were entitled to costs as a result. The omission to award them costs in the earlier ruling was an error apparent on the face of the record. The court exercised its power of review under Order 44 of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 272 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Stanley Livongo Livondo; Respondent: Raila Amolo Odinga; Respondent: Josephine Mwengi; Respondent: Electoral Commission of Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Election Petition 27 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Ruling on Application for Review of Costs
- Outcome
- Application for review allowed. Costs awarded to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents against the Petitioner.
- Judges
- ARM Visram
- Legal Topics
- Costs Award, Review of Orders, Party Entitlement to Costs
- 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
Stanley Livongo Livondo
Applicant
Raila Amolo Odinga
Respondent
Josephine Mwengi
Respondent
Electoral Commission of Kenya
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Ruling on Application for Review of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 2nd and 3rd Respondents are entitled to costs following the dismissal of the Petitioner’s application.
- 2 Whether the court erred in failing to award costs to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents in its earlier ruling.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents were parties to the application, were compelled to participate, and were entitled to costs as a result. The omission to award them costs in the earlier ruling was an error apparent on the face of the record. The court exercised its power of review under Order 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules to correct this error and awarded costs to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, to be paid by the Petitioner.
Court Disposition
Application for review allowed. Costs awarded to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents against the Petitioner.
Orders
- The application dated 3rd November, 2008 is allowed.
- Costs of the application awarded to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to be paid by the Petitioner.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Election Petition 27 of 2008
STANLEY LIVONGO LIVONDO ….……..……………… PETITIONER
VERSUS
RAILA AMOLO ODINGA …….…………….…….. 1ST RESPONDENT
JOSEPHINE MWENGI ………………………....… 2ND RESPONDENT
ELECTORAL COMMISSION OF KENYA …….. 3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
This is an application by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents for Review under Order 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules. They seek the following order:
“That this Hon. Court do review its Order on Costs in its Ruling of 4th April, 2008 and award Costs to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents along with the 1st Respondent.”
By a Ruling handed down 4th April, 2008, I disallowed the Petitioner’s application to examine on oath four deponents, and awarded costs only to the 1st Respondent. Mr Gaturu, Counsel for the 2nd and 3rd Respondents was present and participated in those proceedings. He is aggrieved that costs were not awarded to his clients. He is right. Costs should have been awarded to his clients, but I did not do so erroneously.
In opposing the 2nd and 3rd Respondent’s application, Mr Wamae, Counsel for the 1st Respondent, argued that the issue before the Court, at that time, was essentially between the Petitioner and the 1st Respondent, and accordingly the other Respondents should not be awarded costs. I am unable to accept that argument. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents were indeed dragged into the Petitioner’s application; they were forced to sit through it; and they did indeed participate in the same; and are fully entitled to the costs. Accordingly, I allow their application dated 3rd November, 2008 and award them the costs of that application to be paid by the Petitioner.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 17th day of December, 2008.
ALNASHIR VISRAM
JUDGE