[2023] KEELC 18796 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 18796 (KLR)

The court found that the reasons advanced for adjournment, namely the ailment of counsel and the absence of a medical document, were not sufficiently justified, especially since counsel for the interested parties was able to give directions and had previously arranged for representation. The court also determined...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 18796 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Unity 45 Housing Co-operative Society Limited; Defendant: Peter Ngulu Kimuli; Defendant: Kori Kamuyu; Defendant: Sammy Kamande; Defendant: Peter Mwaga; Interested Party: Dorice Auma Owuor; Interested Party: Timothhy Mwema Kibanga; Interested Party: Joshua Nzua Muthusi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 994 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Adjournment and Substitution of Witness
Outcome
Application for adjournment dismissed; substitution of witness statement allowed; case to proceed.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Hearing, Substitution of Witness, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Adjournment of Hearing Substitution of Witness Admissibility of Evidence

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Unity 45 Housing Co-operative Society Limited

Plaintiff

Peter Ngulu Kimuli

Defendant

Kori Kamuyu

Defendant

Sammy Kamande

Defendant

Peter Mwaga

Defendant

Dorice Auma Owuor

Interested Party

Timothhy Mwema Kibanga

Interested Party

Joshua Nzua Muthusi

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Adjournment and Substitution of Witness

  1. 1 Whether the case should be adjourned due to counsel's ailment and absence.
  2. 2 Whether a new witness statement, claimed to be identical to the previous witness's, should be admitted as evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the reasons advanced for adjournment, namely the ailment of counsel and the absence of a medical document, were not sufficiently justified, especially since counsel for the interested parties was able to give directions and had previously arranged for representation. The court also determined that the substitution of a witness with a new statement identical to the previous witness's statement would not prejudice the proceedings, and thus allowed the new witness statement to be admitted as evidence. The case was ordered to proceed without adjournment.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment dismissed; substitution of witness statement allowed; case to proceed.

Orders

  • The case shall not be adjourned.
  • The new witness statement, being identical to the previous one, shall be admitted as evidence during trial.