[2018] KEELC 2644 (KLR)

[2018] KEELC 2644 (KLR)

The court found that since the plaintiffs had sought to withdraw the suit, the inhibition orders, which were interim in nature, no longer served any purpose and were therefore discharged. On the issue of costs, the court exercised its discretion to order that the plaintiffs pay half the costs to the 1st defendant,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELC 2644 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Zipporah Mwengwa Arthur; Plaintiff: Monicah Igoki; Plaintiff: Irene Makena; Plaintiff: Martin Gatobu; Plaintiff: John Kinyua; Plaintiff: Antony Muriungi; Defendant: Stephen Kirimi; Defendant: John Kimathi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 98 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Case / Ruling on Withdrawal and Costs
Outcome
Suit withdrawn; inhibition orders discharged; costs awarded in part to 1st defendant.
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Suit, Inhibition Orders, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Land and Property Withdrawal of Suit Inhibition Orders 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zipporah Mwengwa Arthur

Plaintiff

Monicah Igoki

Plaintiff

Irene Makena

Plaintiff

Martin Gatobu

Plaintiff

John Kinyua

Plaintiff

Antony Muriungi

Plaintiff

Stephen Kirimi

Defendant

John Kimathi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land and Property Case / Ruling on Withdrawal and Costs

  1. 1 Whether the inhibition orders previously granted should be discharged.
  2. 2 Whether the case should be withdrawn and on what terms as to costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that since the plaintiffs had sought to withdraw the suit, the inhibition orders, which were interim in nature, no longer served any purpose and were therefore discharged. On the issue of costs, the court exercised its discretion to order that the plaintiffs pay half the costs to the 1st defendant, while making no order as to costs in respect of the 2nd defendant, balancing the interests of justice and the conduct of the parties.

Court Disposition

Suit withdrawn; inhibition orders discharged; costs awarded in part to 1st defendant.

Orders

  • The inhibition orders affirmed on 3.11.2015 are hereby discharged.
  • The case is hereby withdrawn with no orders to costs in respect of 2nd defendant but plaintiff to pay half costs to 1st defendant.