Stanley Nkanata & Others v Director of Land Adjudication & Settlement & another [2020] KEELC 1331 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Meru refused to revive a 26-year-old land suit, closing the file after the plaintiffs showed prolonged inexcusable delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Revival of a suit abated against a deceased defendant
The court declined to revive the suit against the 2nd defendant because the applicants failed to show sufficient cause for the delay in substitution and had no grant of letters of administration.
Order 24 Rule 7(2) gives the court discretion to revive an abated suit where the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause. The court traced the plaintiffs' conduct: after learning of the 2nd defendant's death, they were given time to substitute, filed an application they later withdrew, and cited the widow without response. Even at the hearing they had no grant. The efforts came late in the day and the discretion was not exercised in their favour.
Reinstatement of a dismissed suit and the expeditious delivery of justice
The application for reinstatement was dismissed because the delay of over 26 years was prolonged and inexcusable.
Relying on Article 159(2)(b) of the Constitution and the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied, the court held that the plaintiffs' decades of inactivity, repeated adjournments and failure to comply with directions justified the dismissal. Applying the Ivita v Kyumbu test, the delay was prolonged and inexcusable and justice could not be done despite it.
Legal principles established
#- An abated suit is non-existent prior to its revival, and revival requires an appropriate application with justification for the delay and abatement.
- Where no application to join the legal representative of a deceased sole defendant is made within one year, the suit abates against the deceased defendant.
- Reinstatement of a dismissed suit depends on whether the delay is prolonged and inexcusable and whether justice can still be done despite the delay.
Court orders
#- 1.The current application is dismissed with costs
- 2.The file is marked as CLOSED
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction and Civil Procedure Rules (Order 24 Rules 4 and 7(2)) in an application to set aside dismissal and revive/abated suit and substitute a deceased defendant
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Stanley Nkanata & Others v Director of Land Adjudication & Settlement & another [2020] KEELC 1331 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in the judgment (application dated 24.10.2019 in the suit filed 25/10/1994). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/1331/eng@2020-09-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.