Nihazi v Katana & 2 others (Environment & Land Case 10 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 5098 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Mombasa Environment and Land Court refused orders to seize IDs and fingerprints for verification, telling the applicant to get succession records directly from the deputy registrar.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Court should order production and impounding of identity cards and fingerprints for identity verification
The Court declined the orders, finding them unnecessary and impractical, since parties can verify IDs directly and copies of fingerprints cannot be authenticated
The court reasoned that identity cards are tools used in daily transactions and the applicant could simply view originals to verify photographs. Copies of thumbprints could easily be of another person and cannot be authenticated by the Court or the OCPD, so the impounding mechanism under Order 14 rule 4 was inappropriate here. The applicant himself having doubts about his own identity further undermined the application.
Whether certified copies of succession cause proceedings should be produced by the plaintiff
Refused; the applicant should obtain them personally from the deputy registrar of the succession court upon payment of fees, and the prayer was an abuse of process
The court held that any party is entitled to certified copies of court proceedings and grants upon application and payment of the requisite fees. Requiring the plaintiff to procure and produce these documents for the applicant's benefit displayed indolence on the applicant's part and amounted to an abuse of the court process, justifying refusal of prayer 5.
Legal principles established
#- A party may obtain certified copies of proceedings and grants in another cause directly from the deputy registrar of that court by letter and payment of the requisite fees; a party need not move the trial court for such documents
- A prayer for production of a document from a non-party may be treated as a notice to produce
Court orders
#- 1.Prayers 1-6 of the notice of motion dated 16th July 2018 declined
- 2.Prayer 7 granted as a notice to produce: Boniface Katana and/or the plaintiff to provide the 2nd defendant with a certified copy of the ID of Mwanza Ruwa within 30 days of the date of the ruling
- 3.Applicant at liberty to use alternative avenues provided in law to pursue any complaint regarding verification of identities
- 4.Costs of the application awarded to the plaintiff in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 14 Rule (4) of the Civil Procedure Rules; sections 22 and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; article 35 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nihazi v Katana & 2 others (Environment & Land Case 10 of 2018) [2019] KEELC 5098 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Notice of motion dated 16th July 2018 (suit number not stated in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/5098/eng@2019-02-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.