Marino & another v Oduor & 9 others (Environment and Land Case 4 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 1310 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Malindi court refused a late attempt to fix land details in a lawsuit because the proposed corrections contradicted the evidence already given at trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether leave should be granted to amend the plaint to correct the land reference number and measurement after the close of the hearing and upon filing of submissions
- 2.Whether the proposed amendments are consistent with the documentary evidence produced at the hearing
Key legal issues
#Timing of amendment applications after hearing
Amendments may be sought at any stage before judgment, and the timing alone - even on the eve of judgment - does not defeat an amendment application
The court held that since the law allows amendments even after hearing, the applicant could not be faulted for moving just before judgment. Success therefore turned not on the timing but on the nature of the proposed amendments, which the court examined against the evidence on record.
Consistency of post-hearing amendments with the evidence
A post-hearing amendment that would place the pleadings at variance with the evidence adduced at trial must be refused
The indenture exhibited showed 112.82 acres, Folio 270A and File Number 6724, while the amendment proposed 1.029 hectares, Folio 2724/2 and File Number 6726; the power of attorney showed yet other numbers. Since the matter had been heard to conclusion and submissions filed, allowing the amendment would render the pleadings inconsistent with the evidence, and no rehearing was sought, so the orders would be futile.
Legal principles established
#- Amendments sought after a case has been heard must be in consonance with the evidence produced by the parties at the hearing
- An application for amendment of pleadings may be made at any stage before judgment
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 18th September 2025 is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- 2.The suit shall be mentioned on 23rd March 2026 for further directions
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Relief refused
#Leave to amend the plaint
The proposed amendment would put the pleadings at variance with the documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, and no rehearing was sought
Deeming the draft amended plaint properly filed and served
It followed automatically from dismissal of the principal prayer for leave
Costs
The application is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
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.
amendments to pleadings sought before the hearings should be freely allowed, if they can be made without injustice to the other side, and that there is no injustice if the other side can be compensated by costs.
The power of the court to allow amendments is intended to determine the true substantive merits of the case;
for any proposed amendments to be valid where a case has already been heard, they must be in consonance with the evidence produced by the parties at the hearing.
the application dated 18th September 2025 lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondent. This suit shall be mentioned on 23rd March 2026 for further directions.
Issues in the judgment
#The applicant is described inconsistently - the affidavit is by Richard Otara, advocate, while the grounds suggest the applicants are the plaintiffs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Marino & another v Oduor & 9 others (Environment and Land Case 4 of 2022) [2026] KEELC 1310 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 18th September 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1310/eng@2026-03-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.