[2023] KEELC 20690 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs had not established sufficient grounds for adjournment. Pretrial directions had already been given on multiple occasions, including on 3.7.2023, with clear, self-executing timelines for compliance. The absence of the file on 2.10.2023 was deemed irrelevant, as the directions did...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 20690 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Newton Wanjala & 12 others; Defendant: Joseph Ziro Musioma & others; Defendant: 3rd Defendant; Defendant: 4th Defendant; Defendant: 11th Interested Party (in main suit) and 14th and 15th Defendants in the Counter Claim
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 300 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
- Outcome
- Application for adjournment declined.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment of Hearing, Pretrial Directions, Case Management, Consolidation of Cases
- 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
Newton Wanjala & 12 others
Plaintiff
Joseph Ziro Musioma & others
Defendant
3rd Defendant
Defendant
4th Defendant
Defendant
11th Interested Party (in main suit) and 14th and 15th Defendants in the Counter Claim
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Application for Adjournment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established sufficient grounds for adjournment of the hearing.
- 2 Whether the absence of pretrial certification or pending applications justifies adjournment.
- 3 Whether the management of related files affects the progression of the present case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plaintiffs had not established sufficient grounds for adjournment. Pretrial directions had already been given on multiple occasions, including on 3.7.2023, with clear, self-executing timelines for compliance. The absence of the file on 2.10.2023 was deemed irrelevant, as the directions did not require further certification or listing for pretrial. The pending application had been addressed, and the issue of amendment of pleadings had already been ruled upon. The management of related files (No. 10641/2014) did not necessitate adjournment, as the files were to be heard alongside each other but not consolidated, with proceedings recorded separately. Given the age of...
Court Disposition
Application for adjournment declined.
Orders
- The application for adjournment is dismissed.
- The matter shall proceed as previously scheduled.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Wanjala & 12 others v Musioma & others (Environment & Land Case 300 of 2004) [2023] KEELC 20690 (KLR) (9 October 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 20690 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 300 of 2004
LN Mbugua, J
October 9, 2023
Between
Newton Wanjala & 12 others
Plaintiff
and
Joseph Ziro Musioma & others
Defendant
Ruling
1. I have considered the application made by the plaintiff and the interested parties (14th and 15th) to have the case adjourned on the basis that the matter has not been certified for trial, that there is a pending contempt of court application, that the matter was not listed for Pretrail Directions on 2. 10. 2023, that the file was to move alongside file No. 10641/2014 and that plaintiff was to amend their pleadings.
2. This happens to be the second application for adjournment being made by plaintiffs in their quest to have an adjournment today.
3. On Pre Trial directions, I find that the matter has severally been listed for Pre trial directions, for example on 31. 5.2023. On 3. 7.2023, the court conducted pre trial in the virtual platform in the morning and then proceeded with further pretrial directions at 2 pm in open court. The directions given there in were self executing such that parties had definite timelines to comply with courts directions. The court also gave a hearing date of today (9. 10. 2023) and 12. 10. 2023.
4. The date of 2. 10. 2023 came about as a routine measure to receive submissions in respect of the pending application and for further pretrial directions. That “further pretrial” in essence was a process to confirm compliance with directions of 3. 7.2023. And since the said directions of 3. 7.2023 were self executing, none availability of the file on 2. 10. 2023 has no bearing on the matter. To this end, the court will be guided by the holding in the cases of Virginia Kathambi Maina v Nicholas Mwatika & 2 others [2021] eKLR and Moschion v Mwangi(ELC Case No. 350 of 2018) 2023 KEELC.
5. On the pending application, the court duly gave directions on its application and what the court was to confirm is the filing of submissions on 2. 10. 2023. The court will still proceed to confirm issue of compliance today.
6. On amendments of pleadings, the court dealt with the issue in the ruling of 18. 4.2023 hence I need say no more on that issue.
7. On the issue that this file is running alongside file No. 1064/2014 true, the ruling of 31. 5.2023, gave directions for the orders given on 18. 11. 2020 and on 3. 6.2021 to remain in force, such that the files were not consolidated but were to be heard alongside each other. I gave a rider on 31. 5.2023 that proceedings are to be recorded separately in each file. It means that the proceedings in the two files should not be mixed up. The files can only be handled together and no more. In that regard, none of the two files is tied to the other at the hips in terms of the prosecution of the case.
8. To this end, and again considering that the matter is of year 2004, I decline to allow the application for adjournment.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Ndiso and Gichuhi for PlaintiffMwangi and Angwenyi for 1st & 2nd DefendantsMacharia for 3rd DefendantKipchirchir for 4th DefendantOsoro for the 11th Interested Party (in main suit) and 14th and 15th Defendants in the Counter ClaimKasim Felix Wekeso 2nd plaintiff1st and 2nd DefendantsPlaintiffsPatrick Kairu for 3rd DefendantJohn Masesa for 4th DefendantMathew Mbaluka Mutiso 11th Interested Party (also 14th and 15th Defendant in Counter ClaimCourt Assistant: Eddel