Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedPetition dated 12.11.2015 (application dated 24.11.2021)· [2022] KEELC 1652 (KLR)

Anderson Mwirigi Murithi (suing as the Legal representative of Benjamin M’murithi M’muketha alias Benjamin Murithi – Deceased v County Executive Committee Member For Lands, ICT and Planning & another [2022] KEELC 1652 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
9 February 2022
CNC.K. Nzili
478 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court confirmed you can still amend your case documents mid-trial, as long as the change is honest and doesn't unfairly hurt the other side.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Meru (C.K. Nzili, ELC Judge) on an application dated 24 November 2021 brought under Rules 3, 18 and 19 of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice & Procedure Rules 2013. The petitioner, Anderson Mwirigi Murithi, sought leave to amend his petition dated 12 November 2015 to introduce particulars of breach of the alleged constitutional rights, attributing the omission to sheer inadvertence. The petition had already proceeded through viva voce evidence and was at the defence stage. The court held that Rule 18 permits amendment at any stage, guided by the principle that an amendment ought to be allowed unless frivolous or prejudicial, as held in Mombasa Cement Ltd v Speaker of the National Assembly & 2 Others [2016] eKLR and Geyser International Assets Limited v Attorney General & 3 Others [2019] eKLR. Examining the proposed amendments, the court found them genuine and made in good faith to bring out all issues clearly. Since the respondents had already cross-examined the petitioner on the issues raised in the proposed amendments and would still have an opportunity to reply, no prejudice would be occasioned. The application was allowed in the interest of justice. The amended petition was to be filed and served within 7 days, and the respondents granted 14 days from service to file responses. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether leave to amend the petition should be granted at the defence stage of the hearing

Holding

The court allowed the amendment, finding it genuine, made in good faith, and not prejudicial since respondents had already cross-examined the petitioner on the issues and could reply to the amendments.

Reasoning

Rule 18 of the 2013 Practice and Procedure Rules empowers the court to allow amendment at any stage, guided by whether the amendment is frivolous or prejudicial. Guided by Mombasa Cement Ltd v Speaker of the National Assembly and Geyser International Assets Ltd v Attorney General, the court found the proposed amendments genuine and in good faith, aimed at bringing out all issues clearly. As viva voce evidence had been taken, respondents had already cross-examined the petitioner on these issues and could still reply, so no prejudice arose and the interest of justice favoured allowance.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • An amendment ought to be allowed as long as it is not frivolous and does not occasion prejudice to the opposing party, at any stage of proceedings.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application to amend the petition is allowed
  2. 2.The amended petition shall be filed and served within 7 days from the date of the ruling
  3. 3.Respondents are granted leave to file any responses within 14 days upon service

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice & Procedure Rules 2013Rules 3, 18, 19

Cases cited (2)

  • Mombasa Cement Ltd –vs- Speaker of the National Assembly & 2 Others
    [2016] eKLR
  • Geyser International Assets Limited –vs- Attorney General & 3 others
    [2019] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 3, 18 and 19 of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice & Procedure Rules 2013

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Anderson Mwirigi Murithi (suing as the Legal representative of Benjamin M’murithi M’muketha alias Benjamin Murithi – Deceased v County Executive Committee Member For Lands, ICT and Planning & another [2022] KEELC 1652 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition dated 12.11.2015 (application dated 24.11.2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1652/eng@2022-02-09

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