Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherPetition dated 18.5.2020 (Meru ELC)· [2022] KEELC 1405 (KLR)

Meru County Coffee Millers Co-operative Union Limited & 3 others v New Kenya Planters Co-operative Union & another; Robinson Mboloi (Contemnor) [2022] KEELC 1405 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
16 February 2022
CNC.K. Nzili
1,708 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court allowed a public-interest petition to be withdrawn without costs, confirming withdrawal needs leave and costs are discretionary.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This first-instance decision of the Environment and Land Court at Meru dealt with the withdrawal of a constitutional petition dated 18.5.2020 and the consequential question of costs. The petitioners, described as representing 35 coffee farmers' cooperative societies with over 70,000 farmers, had challenged an attempted eviction on 8.5.2020 from leased premises known as Plot No. Meru Municipality 472, leased since 2013 between the defunct Kenya Planters Cooperative Union and parties connected to the County Government of Meru. A conservatory order had issued on 19.5.2020, followed by contempt proceedings. The respondents, through a replying affidavit of Henry Gichuhi Kinyua, admitted there had been a lease that expired on 31.3.2019 and was not renewed, and that the takeover followed the change of law restructuring the coffee sector through the Cherry Fund Regulations 2020. When the petitioners sought to withdraw the petition with no order as to costs, the respondents did not object to withdrawal but claimed costs, submitting costs follow the event and that the matter was complex. Applying Rule 27 of the Mutunga Rules, Nzili J found the reasons for withdrawal valid and genuine, undisputed by the respondents, and granted leave. On costs, applying Jasbir Singh Rai and Baridi Felix Mbevo, the court held the petition was brought in public interest and that, the parties being intertwined, neither had won or lost; the event in which costs follow had not crystallised. The petition was withdrawn with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether leave to withdraw the petition should be granted

Holding

Leave granted; the reasons for withdrawal (the petition being overtaken by events and changed circumstances) were valid and genuine and no prejudice was shown by the respondents

Reasoning

Rule 27 of the Mutunga Rules permits a petitioner to withdraw a petition, with the court determining the juridical effects. The court found the stated reasons valid; respondents did not dispute that circumstances had changed and expressed no prejudice. Applying Arigi and Salat, withdrawal was merited.

p. 3
02

Whether the respondents were entitled to costs despite the withdrawal

Holding

No order as to costs; the petition was brought in public interest and neither party won or lost

Reasoning

Rule 26 confers discretion on costs with a view to access to justice. The petitioners were coffee farmers and members of the 1st respondent; the dispute arose from a change in law restructuring the coffee sector. Applying Jasbir Singh Rai, the event had not crystallised in favour of either party, so no costs were awarded.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • The right to withdraw or discontinue a petition is not automatic but requires valid reasons and the court's leave
  • Costs follow the event but the ultimate factor is the judicial discretion of the court, and public interest is a relevant consideration

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted for the withdrawal of the petition dated 18.5.2020
  2. 2.The petition withdrawn with no order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure ActSection 27
  • Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights & Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules 2013Rules 26, 27 and 27(3)

Cases cited (4)

  • Harry John Paul Arigi & 2 others –vs- Board, Kenya Ports Authority & 2 others
    [2016] eKLR
  • Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat –vs- Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 7 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Jasbir Singh Rai & 3 others –vs- Tarlochan Singh Rai & 4 others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Baridi Felix Mbevo –vs- Musee Mati & 2 others
    [2018] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 22/23 constitutional petition under the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules 2013

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Meru County Coffee Millers Co-operative Union Limited & 3 others v New Kenya Planters Co-operative Union & another; Robinson Mboloi (Contemnor) [2022] KEELC 1405 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition dated 18.5.2020 (Meru ELC). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1405/eng@2022-02-16

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