Criticos & another v AIC Makutano & 66 others (Land Case 3 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5966 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court allowed late amendments to a lawsuit because no defendant would be prejudiced, but stressed that even unopposed applications must be proved on merit.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Plaintiffs' application for further amendment of the plaint dated 24th July 2025 is merited to warrant the grant of the orders sought
Key legal issues
#Whether leave to further amend the plaint should be granted in an unopposed application
Yes - the court examined the merits notwithstanding the lack of opposition and found good cause, as the targeted defendants had not yet testified and no prejudice would result
The court held that even unopposed applications must be shown to be meritorious. Under Order 8 Rules 3(1) and 5(10), amendments may be allowed at any stage on just terms to determine the real question in controversy. The Supporting Affidavit showed the amendment principally targets the 11th and 65th to 67th Defendants who have yet to testify, so no prejudice would be suffered, and Defendants may still amend their defences. With a further hearing date of 23rd October 2025, the amendments would promote expeditious resolution.
Legal principles established
#- An unopposed application must still satisfy the court on its merits before orders are granted
- Amendments to pleadings should be freely allowed at any stage so long as no prejudice is suffered
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiffs are granted leave to file and serve the 'Further Further Amended Plaint' within 5 days
- 2.Upon service, the Defendants shall have 10 days to file and serve their amended defence
- 3.Each party to bear own costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 8 Rules 3(1) and 5(10) of the Civil Procedure Rules
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
It is not automatic that for any unopposed application, the court will as a matter of cause grant the sought orders. It behooves the court to be satisfied that prima facie, with no objection, the application is meritorious and the prayers may be granted
the court may at any stage of the proceedings on such terms as to costs or otherwise as may be just and in such manner as it may direct, allow any party to amend his pleadings
the Plaintiffs application dated 24th July 2025 is hereby allowed in the following terms
Each party to bear own costs of the application
Issues in the judgment
#The case number and full party names of the suit are not stated in the judgment text; the title of the case could not be independently established
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Criticos & another v AIC Makutano & 66 others (Land Case 3 of 2024) (Environment and Land) [2025] KEELC 5966 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5966/eng@2025-08-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.