[2019] KEELC 2191 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 2191 (KLR)

The court found that while there was inordinate delay in filing the application for reinstatement, the reasons advanced by the applicant for non-attendance were adequate. The court exercised its discretion to allow the reinstatement of the dismissed application, but ordered the plaintiff to pay costs to the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 2191 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Veronica Wangare; Defendant: David Wambugu Njaaga; Defendant: Joseph Korir
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 209 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement of Dismissed Application
Outcome
application for reinstatement allowed with conditions
Legal Topics
Reinstatement of Application, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Judicial Discretion, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Reinstatement of Application Dismissal for Non Attendance Judicial Discretion Costs Award

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veronica Wangare

Plaintiff

David Wambugu Njaaga

Defendant

Joseph Korir

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Reinstatement of Dismissed Application

  1. 1 Whether the application for reinstatement of the dismissed application should be allowed.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in filing the application for reinstatement was inordinate and if it should affect the exercise of the court's discretion.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the defendants due to the delay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while there was inordinate delay in filing the application for reinstatement, the reasons advanced by the applicant for non-attendance were adequate. The court exercised its discretion to allow the reinstatement of the dismissed application, but ordered the plaintiff to pay costs to the defendants as a consequence of the delay. The court emphasized that the plaintiff must fix the application for hearing without further delay and comply with the costs order before the next hearing date.

Court Disposition

application for reinstatement allowed with conditions

Orders

  • The application for reinstatement is allowed.
  • The plaintiff shall fix the reinstated application for hearing without delay.