Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCAllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2024] KEELC 7411 (KLR)

Auto Hauliers (K) Limited v Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning & 4 others (Environment & Land Petition 19 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 7411 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
5 November 2024
2,830 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court in Mombasa corrected an arithmetic error in its own judgment, fixing the damages award at Kshs 18 million plus interest totalling Kshs 108 million.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Environment and Land Court at Mombasa (L. L. Naikuni, J) on a Notice of Motion dated 9th September 2024 by the Attorney General, the 5th Respondent, seeking rectification and clarification of Order 5 of the judgment delivered on 16th May 2023 and of the decree extracted on 4th July 2023. The judgment had awarded the Petitioner Kshs. 90,000,000 as general damages described as 5% of quantified damages of Kshs. 360,000,000 for loss of user arising from the unconstitutional and unlawful acquisition of land. The Applicant contended this contained an arithmetic error, since 5% of Kshs. 360,000,000 is Kshs. 18,000,000, not Kshs. 90,000,000, and sought rectification to enable settlement of the decree. The Petitioners opposed, arguing the award covered five years instead of six (2017-2022) and should be rectified upwards to Kshs. 108,000,000. The court framed two issues: whether the application was merited, and who should bear costs. Applying Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act and the slip rule jurisprudence in V. Karsandas Ramuga and Newmont Yandal Operations, the court found the application merited, rectified the award to Kshs. 18,000,000 as general damages, with interest for the years 2017 to 2022 totalling Kshs. 108,000,000, and ordered no costs of the application.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court may rectify the arithmetic error in Order 5 of its judgment awarding Kshs. 90,000,000 as general damages

Holding

The application was merited; the award was rectified to Kshs. 18,000,000 as general damages (5% of Kshs. 360,000,000), with interest for the years 2017 to 2022 totalling Kshs. 108,000,000

Reasoning

Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act codifies the slip rule, permitting correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes at any time. Relying on V. Karsandas Ramuga and Newmont Yandal Operations, the court held the slip rule is exercised only to give effect to the court's intention at the time of judgment. The 5% arithmetic error in the award was a plain mistake correctable under Section 99, and the court clarified the award with interest for the six years 2017 to 2022.

p. 6
02

Who bears the costs of the application

Holding

No orders as to costs

Reasoning

Costs follow the event under Section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, and the successful party is ordinarily entitled to costs. However, the court exercised its discretion not to award costs, expressly reserving its discretion in not awarding costs despite the application having succeeded.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders, or errors arising from accidental slip or omission, may at any time be corrected by the court of its own motion or on application of a party.
  • The slip rule applies as part of the court's inherent jurisdiction, which would otherwise be functus officio upon issuing judgment, but only for limited purposes such as clerical errors and arithmetical mistakes.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion application dated 9th September, 2024 is found to have merit
  2. 2.The Petitioner is awarded Kenya Shillings Eighteen Million (Kshs 18,000,000/-) being General damages of 5% of the quantified damages of Kshs 360,000,000/- for loss of user on the unconstitutional and unlawful acquisition of land to the Government, with interest for the years 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, being a total sum of Kenya Shillings One Hundred and Eight Million (Kshs. 108,000,000/=)
  3. 3.There shall be no orders as to costs of the Notice of Motion application dated 9th September, 2024

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 21Section 1A
  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 21Section 3A
  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 21Section 99
  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 21Section 27(1)
  • Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules 2013Rule 19
  • Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules 2013Rule 25
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Not specified

Cases cited (5)

  • V. Karsandas Ramuga v Mansukhlal Jivuraji & Others
    1965 E.A 700
  • Newmont Yandal Operations Pty Limited v The J. Aron Corp & The Goldman Sachs Group Inc
    [2007] 70 NSWLR 411
  • Jasbir Rai Singh v Tarchalan Singh
    (2014) eKLR
  • Cecilia Karuru Ngayo v Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
    (2014) eKLR
  • Hussein Muhumed Sirat v Attorney General & Another
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 3A and 99 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21; Rules 19 and 25 of 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, "Auto Hauliers (K) Limited v Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning & 4 others (Environment & Land Petition 19 of 2022) [2024] KEELC 7411 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/7411/eng@2024-11-05

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