[2023] KEELC 18882 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 18882 (KLR)

The court declined to grant the adjournment because the applicant failed to provide evidence that the plaintiff's counsel was informed of the request or the change in circumstances. The court emphasized that adjournments are not automatic and must be justified with proper communication to all parties. Since there...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEELC 18882 (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 Application
Outcome
Adjournment application declined; matter to proceed as scheduled.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Hearing, Case Management, Court Discretion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Adjournment of Hearing Case Management Court Discretion

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

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 Application

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an adjournment sought by the defendants' counsel due to counsel's illness.
  2. 2 Whether sufficient communication was made to the plaintiff's counsel regarding the request for adjournment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant the adjournment because the applicant failed to provide evidence that the plaintiff's counsel was informed of the request or the change in circumstances. The court emphasized that adjournments are not automatic and must be justified with proper communication to all parties. Since there was no such evidence, the court exercised its discretion to refuse the adjournment and directed that the matter proceed as scheduled.

Court Disposition

Adjournment application declined; matter to proceed as scheduled.

Orders

  • The application for adjournment is declined.
  • The matter shall proceed as scheduled at 3.00 pm on July 12, 2023.