SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Orioki v Olweny & another; Masese (Interested Party) (Environment & Land Case 266 of 2017) [2023] KEELC 16299 (KLR) (16 March 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELC 16299 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
16299
Citation
[2023] KEELC 16299 (KLR)
Decided
16 March 2023
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a previous rulingCoramOMBWAYO
The court cannot review its previous ruling as the plaintiff failed to show that the ruling was based on an error apparent on the face of the record.

Facts

The plaintiff filed a motion seeking to set aside a previous ruling dismissing her suit due to the death of the defendants and the subsequent closure of the file.

Issues

  • Whether the court can review its previous ruling
  • Whether the previous ruling was based on an error apparent on the face of the record

Reasoning

The court held that the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to show that the previous ruling was based on an error apparent on the face of the record, and thus, the court cannot review its previous ruling.

Outcome

The plaintiff's motion to set aside the previous ruling was denied.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (2)
  • Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 2 others [2018] eKLR
  • Muyodi v Industrial and Commercial Development Corporation & Anor [2006] 1 EA 243
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case