Ngige (Suing as the Personal Representative of David Mahugu Thondu) ((Suing as the Personal Representative of David Mahugu Thondu)) v Kariuki & 4 others (Environment & Land Case 138 & 146 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 4496 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kajiado court reinstated a stay application dismissed after counsel missed a virtual hearing, ruling that technical hitches can explain absence even without proof.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether reinstatement of the dismissed Notice of Motion dated 14th August 2024 was merited
Yes; the application was reinstated
Order 12 Rule 7 empowers the court to set aside a dismissal on just terms. The court found counsel's explanation of technical hitches reasonable despite lack of evidence, held the one-month delay was not inordinate on the Muya test, found no prejudice to the Respondent, and left the sub judice question for later determination.
Whether the one month delay in filing the reinstatement application was inordinate
It was a delay but not inordinate, inexcusable or prejudicial
Applying the Supreme Court's guidance in Muya that whether a delay is inordinate is a case-by-case factual question, the court found the one month delay did not cause injustice to the Respondent.
Whether the pending Court of Appeal application rendered the matter sub judice
That question could not be determined at the reinstatement stage
The court held that the issue before it was reinstatement only; once reinstated, parties could canvass the sub judice ground at the appropriate forum.
Legal principles established
#- The decision to reinstate a dismissed suit is discretionary and depends on explanation for non-attendance, delay, prejudice, merit of the cause and interest of justice
- Technological hitches on virtual court platforms occur frequently and an explanation of absence based on them may be accepted even without supporting evidence
Court orders
#- 1.The order issued on 22nd October 2024 dismissing the Notice of Motion dated 14th August 2024 set aside
- 2.The Notice of Motion dated 14th August 2024 reinstated to be heard on its merits
- 3.Costs of the application in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 51 Rules 5 and 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Nchoe v Naigisa (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E002 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 7613 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 7613 (KLR)6 Nov 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ngige (Suing as the Personal Representative of David Mahugu Thondu) ((Suing as the Personal Representative of David Mahugu Thondu)) v Kariuki & 4 others (Environment & Land Case 138 & 146 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELC 4496 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4496/eng@2025-06-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.