Republic v District Adjudication & Settlement Officer, Meru Central & 2 others; Kangethe & another (Exparte Applicants); Ngai (Interested Party) (Judicial Review E005 of 2022) [2023] KEELC 18116 (KLR) (14 June 2023) (Ruling)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 18116
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 18116 (KLR)
- Decided
- 14 June 2023
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureApplicant seeks to have the suit heard by viva voce evidence, while the interested party argues for adavit evidence.CoramC.K YANO
Holding
The court directs that the matter be heard by adavit evidence.
Facts
The suit involves judicial review proceedings related to the registration of land interests by the Land Registrar.
Issues
- Whether the suit should be heard by viva voce evidence or adavit evidence.
- Whether the decision of the 2nd respondent was rational, reasonable, or an abuse of discretion.
Reasoning
The court finds it inappropriate to direct viva voce evidence due to the nature of judicial review proceedings, which are limited to reviewing the decision-making process.
Outcome
The court directs the matter to be heard by adavit evidence.
Orders
- The matter is to be heard by adavit evidence.
Authorities cited
Cases cited (5)
- Suchan investment Limited vs Ministry of National Heritage and Culture & 3 others [2015] eKLR
- Praxidis Namomi Saisi & others v Director of Public Prosecution & 2 others SC Petitions 39 Consolidated with Sc Petition 40 of 2019
- SGS Kenya Limited v Energy Regulatory Commission & 2 others, Sc Petition No. 2 of 2019 [2019] Eklr
- Praxidis Namoni Saisi &7 others (supra)
- Suchan investment Limited (supra)
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…