Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2019] KEELC 4996 (KLR)

Barua Gituma & 6 others v National Land Commission & 2 others [2019] KEELC 4996 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
15 January 2019
PNP. M. Njoroge
254 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court at Chuka allowed local landowners to join an ongoing land petition as respondents because the court's decision could affect their land.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Chuka delivered by P. M. Njoroge, J, on 15 January 2019. The applicants, led by Andriano Mugwiria, moved the court by a notice of application dated 21 November 2018 brought under Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act, seeking to be enjoined as respondents in a pending petition. They contended that they were likely to be affected by the orders the court would make in the proceedings, and that they hailed from the Gakurungu adjudication area where they owned land parcels. When the parties attended a directions hearing on 15 January 2019, the petitioners' advocate indicated that the petitioners were not opposed to the application. The court accordingly allowed the application, enjoined the interested parties as respondents in the petition, and directed them to respond to the petition within 21 days of the ruling. They were further directed to comply with all other orders issued by the court that day in another ruling. Costs were ordered to be in the cause. The judgment contains no citation of case law and no separate opinions; the bench comprised a single judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the interested parties should be joined as respondents in the petition

Holding

The application was allowed; the interested parties were enjoined as respondents and given 21 days to respond to the petition.

Reasoning

The application, brought under Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and provisions of the Civil Procedure Act, was unopposed: the petitioners' advocate stated at the directions hearing that the petitioners were not opposed to it. On the applicants' ground that they hail from the Gakurungu adjudication area and own land parcels there, and are likely to be affected by the orders the court may make, the court allowed joinder without opposition.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A party likely to be affected by orders in proceedings may properly be enjoined as a respondent

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application is allowed and the interested parties are enjoined as respondents in the petition
  2. 2.The interested parties are directed to respond to the petition within 21 days
  3. 3.The interested parties are directed to comply with all other orders issued by the court in another ruling
  4. 4.Costs shall be in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 1 Rule 3
  • Civil Procedure ActSections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A, 63(e)
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 1 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Sections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Barua Gituma & 6 others v National Land Commission & 2 others [2019] KEELC 4996 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/4996/eng@2019-01-15

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.