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

Waithaka & 2 others v Waiganjo (Environment and Land Appeal E062 of 2021 & 17 of 2022 (Consolidated)) [2024] KEELC 13373 (KLR) (18 November 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KEELC 13373 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
13373
Citation
[2024] KEELC 13373 (KLR)
Decided
18 November 2024
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

TypeEnvironment and Land AppealPostureAppeal from a previous judgmentCoramJG KEMEI
The Application is allowed as prayed, and the 1st Appellant is granted leave to come on record.

Facts

The 1st Appellant seeks orders to review a previous judgment regarding the suit land, Ruiru/Ruiru East /Block 2/3516, registered in the Respondent's name. New evidence was discovered, including a letter from Nyakinyua Investment Company & Gatundu Nyakinyua Company Ltd and a Share Certificate.

Issues

  • Whether the Application for review of the judgment is merited
  • Whether the 1st Appellant has the right to legal representation by Counsel

Reasoning

The Court allows the Application for review of the judgment, as the 1st Appellant has the right to legal representation by Counsel of their choice, and the new evidence discovered is not within the 1st Appellant's knowledge or could not be produced at the time of the previous judgment.

Outcome

The Application is allowed

Orders

  • The 1st Appellant is granted leave to come on record

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Civil Procedure Rules
⚠ 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