Republic v Director Land Adjudication & Settlement & 5 others; Nzungila (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E001 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 274 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused cross-examination in a land judicial review case, ruling parties must prove compelling reasons before questioning affidavit witnesses.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court should allow cross-examination of the Exparte Applicant and the 4th Respondent on their affidavits in judicial review proceedings
The request for summons for cross-examination was not merited; judicial review evidence is normally disposed of on affidavit evidence without cross-examination
The court acknowledged its discretion under Order 19 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to allow cross-examination on affidavits where necessary to clarify issues or uncover relevant information. However, it found the proceedings fit the normal judicial review mould, and that deviation to include cross-examination would go against normal practice. The 6th Respondent did not identify the paragraphs on which cross-examination was intended and did not demonstrate its necessity or relevance to the substantive issues.
Whether leave should be granted to the 6th Respondent to file a supplementary affidavit
Granted, within a limited time of 7 days, with reciprocal leave for other parties
The court accepted that the 6th Respondent, whose counsel came on record on 25th November 2024, sought to avail evidence pertinent to the fair determination of the proceedings. It balanced this against delay concerns by imposing strict time limits: 7 days for the supplementary affidavit and 7 days thereafter for the Exparte Applicant and 1st to 5th Respondents to file further affidavits if necessary.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking cross-examination of deponents in judicial review proceedings must provide a compelling reason demonstrating why cross-examination is necessary to achieve justice
- The court has a discretion under Order 19 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules to order cross-examination on affidavits when appropriate
Court orders
#- 1.The 6th Respondent is granted 7 days to file and serve her supplementary affidavit
- 2.Upon service, the Exparte Applicant and 1st to 5th Respondents shall have 7 days to file any further affidavits if deemed necessary
- 3.Any other relief not expressly granted is deemed as declined
- 4.Each party to bear own costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original judicial review jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court (no specific constitutional or statutory basis stated in the judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Director Land Adjudication & Settlement & 5 others; Nzungila (Exparte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E001 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 274 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Judicial Review proceedings; ruling on the 6th Respondent's application dated 30th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/274/eng@2025-01-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.