https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3517

Trisquare Ltd v Larsen & another (Environment and Land Case E200 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3517 (KLR) (11 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 3517 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi Environment and Land Case E200 of 2025 CG Mbogo, J June 11, 2026 Between Trisquare Limited Applicant and Christian Lau Larsen 1st Respondent Susan Clare Larsen 2nd Respondent Ruling 1.Before this court for determination is the notice of motion dated 3rd January, 2026 filed by the plaintiff/applicant, and it is expressed to be brought under Article 50 (1) of the Constitution of Kenya, Sections 3 & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rules 1 to 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking the following orders:i.That the oral/ex-parte application by Kaplan & Stratton Advocates (the respondents), before deputy registrar on 12th November, 2025 without notice to the plaintiff seeking the matter in the plaintiffs application of 11th August, 2025 to be placed before Hon. Justice Mbogo for directions plus any resultant directions thereof, be declared irregular and unlawful and set aside, and the matter revert to its earlier status prior to the oral application. 2.The application is premised on the grounds on its face. It is supported by the affidavit of Samuel Kuria Mbugua acting on behalf of the plaintiff/applicant sworn on even date. The plaintiff/applicant deposed that during the mention of this suit on 12th November, 2025 Kaplan & Stratton Advocates, the counsel on record for the defendants/respondents made an oral application to the deputy registrar seeking that its application dated 11th August, 2025 be placed before this court for directions without prior notice. The plaintiff/applicant deposed that all its efforts to object to the oral application was preempted by immediate recording by the deputy registrar giving a mention date of 19th January, 2026. 3.The plaintiff/applicant deposed that the court cannot lawfully proceed ex-parte without violating Articles 47 and 50(1) of Constitution of Kenya on the right of fair hearing in conformity with law, since the court had ordered for re-service of its application to Kaplan & Stratton Advocates. The plaintiff/ applicant contended that the oral application by Kaplan & Stratton Advocates to the deputy registrar was irregular and unprocedural since assignment of judges or allocation of files are an internal judicial function handled administratively, not something a party can apply for orally. Further, the matter in the application by the defendants/respondents on record has been appealed at the Court of Appeal at Nairobi filed on 22nd December, 2025 and served upon the firm of Kaplan and Stratton Advocates and therefore cannot be a basis for varying its application by this court as orally applied by the said firm. 4.The defendants/respondents did not file their response to the application. The application was canvassed through written submissions. The plaintiff/applicant filed submissions dated 7th March, 2026. 5.The plaintiff/applicant herein raises issue with an oral application made by Kaplan & Stratton Advocates on 12th November, 2025 to have their application placed before me, which they state was an ex-parte order that was irregular and unprocedural. It is well accepted as common practice in our courts that one of the many of the Deputy Registrars’ duties is to handle case management and to give appropriate directions to parties to ensure the case is ready for hearing before the judge. 6.This is set out by Order 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Order 11 Rule 3(5) thereof stipulates that:-“Where orders or directions are given at a case management conference —a.The judge or deputy registrar or magistrate or case management officer shall record the orders or directions and inform the parties thereof; and(b)where necessary, the judge or deputy registrar or magistrate or case management officer shall allocate time within which the orders or directions shall be complied with by the parties and fix a date at which the judge or deputy registrar or magistrate or case management officer shall record compliance by the parties or make such other orders as may be just or necessary including the striking out of the suit.” 7.Thus, the deputy registrar is mandated to give directions and assign the judge to handle the matter in the management of cases as part of administrative duties. As for the merit of the defendants’/respondents’ application, the issue is not before me within this application, and the same will be addressed at its due hearing and determination, as will the plaintiff/applicant’s application dated 11th August, 2025. It is also unclear to the court why the plaintiff/applicant refers to the defendants as ‘joinder’ defendants, as there is no such term, a defendant is a defendant once they are joined to a suit, whether initially or later on. 8.The upshot of the above is that the court finds no merit in the notice of motion dated 3rd January, 2026 and it is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED & DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.HON. MBOGO C.G.JUDGE11/06/2026.In the presence of:Mr. Benson Agunga - Court assistantProf. Samuel Kuria Mbugua acting in persons for Trisquare LimitedMr. Bett holding brief for Mr. Kahura for the Defendants